Starting discussion on a new version of the notification spec

[Marc-André Lureau]

Hi

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Lennart Poettering<mzkqt at 0pointer.de> wrote:
> On Mon, 15.06.09 11:38, Mirco Müller (mirco.mueller at canonical.com) wrote:
>
>> Am Samstag, den 13.06.2009, 23:18 +0200 schrieb Aurélien Gâteau:
>>
>> > > 3.  The Ubuntu spec adds a 'sound-themed' hint, while we already have
>> > > 'sound-file'.  I'd suggest just overloading 'sound-file' to take either
>> > > a sound theme name or a sound file.  Implementations that only support a
>

Why overloading? Why not just have a new "sound-name" property ?

> The big question of course is whether it should be the bubble daemon
> or the triggering application that actually calls into
> libcanberra. The former would have the advantage that the event sound
> could be attached to the actual bubble window, and ovveride as such
> the builtin window sounds. The latter would have the advantage that it
> could set from within the application's context every property on the
> event sound it might feel necessary.
>
> I am leaning towards saying that the event soundshould be triggered
> from the bubble daemon, but I am not entirely sure I must admit.

I agree. If the client would like to override the bubble daemon sound,
it can set "suppress-sound" hint.

Thank you Aurelien, for starting the discussion. I will try to involve
some maemo people too, because we have our range of extensions to the
notification spec. Also, palm pre made the Notification service an
important part of their webos, see
http://developer.palm.com/webos_book/book3.html, for instance.

regards,

-- 
Marc-André Lureau
Sent from Helsinki, Southern Finland, Finland