mime apps specification

Jerome Leclanche adys.wh at gmail.com
Sun Apr 6 01:00:12 PDT 2014

Once we get sandboxed applications (which afaict are still in the
works), apps will no longer be able to touch ~/.local and will only
see their own ~/.config. So it makes sense to let them control mime
associations through a dbus call instead of having them do their own

I have a feeling this is something else that will have to be
standardized down the line as we would want apps to only have a single
dbus interface for this. I'm just speculating though; I'll have a look
at implementing something like this in LXQt once I'm back home.

J. Leclanche

On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 2:50 AM, Mark Edgington <edgimar at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Jerome Leclanche <adys.wh at gmail.com> wrote:
>> For what it's worth, I agree. However the use case of browsers asking
>> to be default has to be taken into account, and we are very far from
>> being able to offer them an api to *properly* become so.
> Hi Jerome,
> I recall someone mentioning on this list not to long ago the idea of
> having desktop-environment-specific applications which are able to run
> with slightly higher privileges than "ordinary user applications".  I
> don't know what all would have to go into making something like this a
> reality, but to me it makes a lot of sense.
> For example, if such a separation of privileges were possible, then a
> user could, via standard desktop-environment configuration tools,
> choose among a set of applications registered for a particular use,
> deciding which one(s) should be default (or that the user should be
> prompted to choose between when opening some kind of
> resource/document).  But, a mere web-browser or other application
> would not have the necessary privileges to make such a change -- the
> only thing they would be allowed to do is to launch the
> desktop-environment "default apps" tool, and give the user
> instructions on what they should do if they wish to make "browser X"
> the default.  Of course "ordinary apps" would be allowed to register
> themselves as handlers for different MIME types, but they would not
> have the authority / permissions to make themselves default -- that
> decision would be something a user would explicitly need to choose via
> the desktop-environment's config tools.
> Nonetheless, even if the above (separate permissions) scenario were to
> exist, it would still be important to have some kind of standard API
> for choosing a single default and/or preferred-set of apps to handle
> different MIME-types, so that this information could be shared between
> different desktop-environments, and so that desktop-environment
> developers would have a standard by which to develop their
> "default-app selection" tools.
> What do you think about this?  How feasible would something like this
> be to implement?  If it could be implemented, it would certainly
> guarantee a lot more user-control over preferred apps, etc.
> Regards,
> Mark

More information about the xdg mailing list