From kde-core-devel Fri Jul 12 06:15:09 2002 From: "Dawit A." Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 06:15:09 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: Constructive feedback from Eugenia X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=102647664729311 On Thursday 11 July 2002 21:14, Waldo Bastian wrote: > On Thursday 11 July 2002 03:31 pm, Waldo Bastian wrote: > > 2) KDesktop -> RMB on Icon -> Open With > > Should be a submenu with a list of suitable applications (we know the > > mimemtype!) and then as a seperate entry the open-with-dialog. > > (I can do that :-) > > Look mommy, with no hands. And I was about to reply with "it works that way here..." :) > Anyway, I think it would be better to always have the menu the same, so > that the first case would look like: > "Open With >" > "KPackage" > --------- > "Other" /me remember telling that to David a long time ago when that was being=20 implemented since the sub-menu approach was my idea IIRC. At the time I=20 did not like that all the associated applications were directly listed in t= he=20 context menu. However, David suggested (he'll correct me if I'm wrong:))=20 that if only one application is associated with a mime-type it would be muc= h=20 easier/quciker for the user to find if it was listed above. I did not much= =20 care for that idea because it would be inconsistent just as you suggested. = =20 Anyways, I personally think it should be like the way you outlined it above. > I'm not sure how the "Open With" section should look like if there is no > application listed at all. Strictly speaking you wouldn't need it at all > then, because the "Open" option would act as "Open With" already anyway. If there is no application associated then it becomes: Open With... > In the case of kdesktop, the "Open" option (previously "Open In New > Window") could also be named "Open with " but I'm not sure if th= at > extra information is helpfull or distracting. Hmm... It can even be argued that even "Open" or any varity on it is=20 unnecessary and redundant since it duplicates the functionality of the Open= =20 With-> option... I think the LMB would be enough for default action AFAIC.= =20 I personally have never RMB clicked on an icon to select Open. It is just= =20 too much hassle when you can just LMB... However, if I know that a given=20 mime-type opens with a certain application by default and I do not want tha= t,=20 I RMB click on the icon to use the Open With->. This story however is=20 completely different in a file manager like konqueror though since "Open in= =20 New Window" (MMB) means something completely different than what it does on= =20 the the desktop. Hence, I personally think that the "Open" option should=20 completely be removed from the RMB in the desktop... > Should the "Open With >" submenu be located directly under the "Open" > option? IMHO, no. My argument for this is that "Open", which should be removed=20 completely :), is sort of like the default action, i.e. the LMB/MMB click=20 action. "Open With..." are extra options that allow you to pick which I da= re=20 to argue are used rarely. So these items should be located below other=20 options which are like to be used more often that it. At least that is how= I=20 think Context menus should be organized ?? =20 Regards, Dawit A.