Actions extensions in File Managers - Draft 0.12

PCMan at
Sat Jul 17 03:53:09 PDT 2010

Another potential problem of this spec.
When we validate all actions against currently selected files, we can
get a list of valid actions.
However, if an action is also in ItemList of another menu, should we
only show it in that menu and remove it from the context menu, or show
it both in the context menu of the file managers and the sub menus
defined with ItemList?
Or, in this case, we should set TargetContext=false, so it's hidden
from the main context menu, but can be shown in sub menus since it's
listed in ItemList of another Menu?

On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 5:06 PM, PCMan < at> wrote:
> After trying to implement this spec, I have some suggestions.
> Actions (desktop entries with Type="Action") and menus (desktop
> entries with Type="Menu") are actually very similar.
> The only difference is that an action takes "Profiles" and a menu
> reads a "ItemList".
> Why not just merge them? For example:
> [Desktop Entry]
> Type=Action or Menu
> Name=name
> Icon=icon-name
> Tooltip=tooltip
> Profiles=profile1;profile2;  <--- applies to both action or menu.
> # ItemList is defined in profiles, not here.
> [X-Action-Profile profile1]
> Exec=command line # This is only valid when Type=Action
> ItemList=item1;item2;item3; # This is only valid when Type=Menu
> [X-Action-Profile profile2]
> TryExec=try_exec
> Exec=command line # This is only valid when Type=Action
> ItemList=item1;item2;item3; # This is only valid when Type=Menu
> In this way, both of the actions and menus can be validated against
> different conditions and have different profiles.
> In your original spec, menus don't have profiles. However, after
> trying to implement this spec, I think this is a required feature.
> With these modifications, menu and action become the same object. The
> only difference is in "Type" and their profiles.
> Profiles of "Action" defines Exec and that of "Menu" defines ItemList instead.
> This greatly simplify the spec while make it more featureful at the same time.
> Please consider this. If a patch for this spec is needed, I can create one.
> Since I don't have the source file of your spec, I cannot do it now.
> Hope you can understand what I'm talking about.
> Cheers!
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 11:02 PM, Pierre Wieser <pwieser at> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I just updated the DES-EMA draft [1] to its version 0.12.
>> There are three changes:
>> - in the writing, "Same as DES" words have been replaced by the
>> corresponding excerpt from DES;
>> - Capabilities default value changes from "*;" to an empty list
>> (do not care of any capabilities);
>> - Capabilities is a ANDed list.
>> As usual, comments are welcome.
>> Regards
>> Pierre
>> [1]
>> _______________________________________________
>> xdg mailing list
>> xdg at

More information about the xdg mailing list