Binary name in the desktop file
Liam R E Quin
liam at holoweb.net
Thu Dec 26 13:26:23 PST 2013
On Thu, 2013-12-26 at 21:15 +0000, Jerome Leclanche wrote:
> For the exact same reason menus and any kind of application runners
> do. That is to say, not that much. It's needed for the rarer case
> where the application accepts different parameters/different command
> line depending on whether it has input args or not.
If you go to the gnome Applications menu and launch a program, it has no
file arguments (it might have arguments, e.g. -gui to show the graphical
user interface, but no files).
I'm unclear about the case where this isn't sufficient.
> I understand the inherent
> need to be conservative in a spec, but more often than not there is a
> vicious circle building up of "We don't need it that much, so let's do
> without it" -> "Now we need it more, but it's too late to change it".
This is always a difficulty with standards.
The way around it is to try and make extensible standards, but the
desktop spec has only limited extensibility.
> It does seem to
> be that changes only happen once kde/gnome needs them.
Or presumably other desktop environments if they can give a clear
explanation of why something is needed, e.g.
* what exactly does the user do
* what currently happens
* what do you want to happen
* how do you think that should be achieved
instead of throwing jargon around (intents, runners) :-)
I'm getting the impression runners are some kind of KDE plugin thing,
but I'm lost as to why they are relevant to a cross-desktop spec;
I don't know what intents are at all in this context.
Xross-desktop standards really only work when multiple desktops need to
do something, and there's a need to share part of the implementation.
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml
More information about the xdg