Icon-mime type associations

Kenneth Wimer wimer at suse.de
Fri Sep 17 01:20:29 EEST 2004

* Frans Englich <frans.englich at telia.com> [Sep 17. 2004 00:01]:
> On Thursday 16 September 2004 01:48, Ryan Gammon wrote:
> A common use of mimetype icons is to follow up the document/context centric 
> model; an icon tries to resemble what it represents as close as possible in 
> order to make the user's association steps as short as possible. Functional 
> names is another example. If cases like this(3rd party branding, I guess) is 
> the major reason for the usage of such an mechanism, it would be a step 
> backwards in terms of usability, AFAICT.
> Another aspect is how much influence 3rd parties should have on the system, 
> and hence who "decides" how the system should be. For example(from anecdotal 
> evidence), in MS Windows, the installing of applications is quite intrusive 
> since they change MIME-association priorities, icons, etc. -- "This 
> application should You use". I think holding back 3rd parties' influence 
> would gain the user(whom's concern is not only one application), promote 
> consistency & usability, and help avoiding the chaos of applications which 
> Windows have. (as Jakub discussed)

I agree 100%. I should, of course, also be possible to change which
programs are set as "default", even if the distributor/desktop wanted
you to use something else.

SUSE Linux - a Novell Company - Nuernberg, Germany
Scheinbare Rechtschreibfehler beruhen auf einer individuellen

More information about the xdg mailing list