mime apps specification

Vladimir Kudrya vladimir-csp at yandex.ru
Sun Apr 13 10:34:43 PDT 2014

Hello everyone!
I am translator and tester of SpaceFM file manager.
There were some heated discussion of the new mime spec 

As it is still in flux I'd like to share some thoughts. The ordering and 
precedence in the spec is somewhat shady. For example current spec does 
not allow removed association to be re-added further downstream. David 
Faure replied that clarifications will follow.

In the meantime, I would like to make some fresh-eyed input.
Do the following statements cover the intended meaning of the algorithm? 
Let's say these are both questions and suggestions:

The ordered list of associations of given mimetype is forming from 
upstream to downstream, every downstream part takes precedence and 
overrides its upstream part.
Items in [Default Applications] influence ordering only.
Items in [Added Associations] influence presence only (just as content 
of .desktop files).
Items in [Removed Associations] are removed from list in current iteration.

The order of sources of item is this (from upstream to downstream):
$XDG_DATA_DIRS .desktop files >
$XDG_DATA_DIRS mimeapps.list >
$XDG_DATA_DIRS $desktop-mimeapps.list >
$XDG_CONFIG_DIRS mimeapps.list >
$XDG_CONFIG_DIRS $desktop-mimeapps.list >
$XDG_DATA_HOME .desktop files >
$XDG_DATA_HOME mimeapps.list >
$XDG_DATA_HOME $desktop-mimeapps.list >
$XDG_CONFIG_HOME mimeapps.list >
$XDG_CONFIG_HOME $desktop-mimeapps.list >

Another opinion is voiced by IgnorantGuru, the developer of SpaceFM. He 
points out that separate [Default Applications] is redundant and is a 
big step away from KISS principle. List ordering in [Added Associations] 
should be enough to change/determine default application.

Thank you for your time!

More information about the xdg mailing list