AurélienRE: Proposing the StatusNotifier specification

[Giles Atkinson]

Aurélien,

Your message below prompted me to read the specification, something that has been on my "to do" list since the original post.  I do have a few comments.

1) This represents a huge increase in complexity and in dependencies for client programs. (The client side of the previous specification can be implemented in a handful of Xlib calls.) It would be useful to indicate what problems will be solved by the change.

2) The set of four permitted notification categories seems very restrictive. Is that deliberate?

3) Although there is a section titled "Backwards Compatability", there is no compatabilty support for client programs using the old specification.  Instead it seems that programs are required to implement both, as well as make additional D-bus queries.

Thanks,

Giles

-----Original Message-----
From: xdg-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org [mailto:xdg-bounces at lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of Aurélien Gâteau
Sent: 06 January 2010 10:29
To: xdg at lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: Proposing the StatusNotifier specification

Hi,

It has been over two weeks now and nobody commented on the spec. Can I
deduce from this that everyone is fine with us switching to
org.freedesktop.StatusNotifierItem?

Aurélien
_______________________________________________
xdg mailing list
xdg at lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg