JobViewServer specification proposal

Aaron J. Seigo aseigo at
Wed Apr 9 02:42:07 PDT 2008

On Tuesday 08 April 2008, Rafael Fernández López wrote:
> The main idea is that when an application needs a new amount type, we
> review the specification (if the change is for that purpose we can update
> it almost inmediatly if the new type has sense, and notify all interested
> parties).

that seems like quite a bit of hassle and coordination just to add a new unit 
type, and honestly it isn't that hard to think of new ones. additionally, 
what do we do about units that only one application would ever use? ignore it 
or bloat the spec? how are unknown units dealt with in between spec updates 
or on older systems?

i take it that this is about i18n and consistent display of labels, correct?

i think having common types available is good, but there ought to be a "good 
enough" fallback for adding random new units by doing the translation for 
these on the client side somehow.

Aaron J. Seigo
humru othro a kohnu se
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43

KDE core developer sponsored by Trolltech
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : 

More information about the xdg mailing list