Moving towards version 1.0 of desktop entry spec

Vincent Untz vuntz at
Mon Apr 24 09:54:43 EEST 2006

Le dimanche 23 avril 2006 à 16:39 -0700, Bastian, Waldo a écrit :
> >> + is the FSDevice type used by a project? We don't use it in GNOME,
> and
> >>   I'd like to deprecate it if possible.
> >
> >It's in use in KDE 3.
> >
> >> + I wonder about the Actions key. It does make sense to me, but we
> >>   don't support it in GNOME and we only had one (old) bug report
> about
> >>   it. Do other projects use it?
> >
> >Used in KDE 3, though mostly in service menus and screensavers. I found
> >only one case being used in the menus.
> For the things that are used in one imlementation but that aren't widely
> supported it's probably a good approach to keep them in the spec but
> mention that they are an optional part of the spec for know and specify
> what implementations that don't support the functionality should do with
> it.

It depends on how you'd do it :-)

If the thing is a feature that sounds useful to other projects which
didn't implement it, then I believe we should leave it as it is, and
mark it as optional.

But we can also use a "Currently reserved for use within XXX" appendix
(like what we have for KDE right now).

Note that I can see how the Actions key can be useful, so I'd be
inclined to implement it in GNOME. I'm less sure for the FSDevice type,
for example.

> I expect that will come down to a slight more verbose version of "Just
> ignore it."

To be honest, I'm not fond of the "just ignore it" possibility in a spec
(except maybe in an appendix). It just makes you doubt of what should be
implemented (if you're an implementor) or what feature of the spec you
can use (if you're a developer).



Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.

More information about the xdg mailing list