On Thursday 29 October 2009, Aurélien Gâteau wrote: > Marco Martin a écrit : > > On Thursday 29 October 2009, Aurélien Gâteau wrote: > >> Aaron J. Seigo a écrit : > >>> for instance, the whole message indicator plasmoid you wrote could be > >>> completely, 100% implemented using KNotificationItems with associated > >>> KNotifications used for the sporadic/temporal events. > >> > >> This is a bit off-topic, but I would like to ensure I get it correctly. > >> > >> There would be one KNotificationItem per app (== server in Message > >> Indicator (MI) speak), and each indicator would be represented by a > >> KNotification? This would mean a KNotificationItem contains > >> KNotification instances? > >> How would you assign a KNotification to a particular KNotificationItem? > >> How would you represent concepts such as indicator count or indicator > >> time? > > > > an application in theory can have more than one notificationitem, but the > > usual case is one, yes > > the idea is to associate globally to the KNotifications of an app a > > KNotificationItem (that can be the only one, usually), then when a > > notification of an app pops up it can automatically set the status of the > > notificationitem to requestingattention > > a next step can be making the notificationitem to know all the > > notifications in this way it will be possible to show only notifications > > associated to a particular app, for instance instant messaging, so here > > we have also the knowledge about how many messages there are and when. > > > > A way, perhaps, once KNotification has a default knotificationitem set > > globally a KNotification could add itself to that kni upon creation. then > > what would be need is a way to display -only- those notifications > > OK, so Message Indicator could be implemented using KNotificationItem, > but it would require significant changes. well, yeah adapting a system to another usually turns out to be a bit painful, a bonus we could have from this however is to not require extra api from the applications to learn > > since a name of the main thing implies also the names of the two other > > components, the set could be: > > -KStatusItem, with StatusItem dbus interface > > -StatusHost > > -StatusWatcher > > > > StatusHost and StatusWatcher could even become StatusItemWatcher and > > StatusItemHost, to make clear they are part of the same thing > > Sounds good to me. As I said, I would like to help making the necessary > changes. I should have some time tomorrow to help if you are available. deal :D -- Marco Martin