[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-panel-devel
Subject:    Re: VDG suggestions and wishes about the system tray
From:       Thomas Pfeiffer <colomar () autistici ! org>
Date:       2014-08-30 12:31:16
Message-ID: 5615837.IHeTJujrWZ () lenovo
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thursday 28 August 2014 12:14:28 Sebastian K=FCgler wrote:
> On Thursday, August 28, 2014 12:08:04 Martin Klapetek wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Sebastian K=FCgler <sebas@kde.org> wr=
ote:
> > =

> > On Tuesday, August 26, 2014 22:00:54 Eike Hein wrote:
> > > Hiding "passive" status notifier items robs the user of an
> > > entire tier of organization when deciding how near/far they
> > > want to place a running app.
> > =

> > This may also encourage more abuse: i.e. not setting the status to hidd=
en,
> > ever. Remember that we're often dealing with apps who want to forego be=
ing
> > shown in the taskbar (presumably to save space). Effectively, this means
> > that apps will set their status to always be active, leading to more
> > clutter in the panel.
> > =

> > On the other hand, it's how Unity (and maybe others?) work for years.
> > Let's
> > find out if it was a real problem for them and about how many apps are
> > they
> > aware of abusing this?
> =

> Ah, yes, thought about that, too.
> =

> I agree that it could be tried, but I wouldn't be surprised if for Plasma,
> we come to a different conclusion. There's a certain difference in the
> "audiences" between Unity and Plasma, and that might very well manifest
> itself in apps having problems with this behaviour in Plasma (those that
> don't care about Unity). On the other hand, more consistent behaviour
> between statusnotifier implementations is probably a good thing.

I just looked up the draft specification (since there is no final one yet) =

from our side [1] and looky what I found:

"Passive: The item doesn't convey important information to the user, it can=
 be =

considered an "idle" status and is likely that visualizations will chose to =

hide it."

Yes, that doesn't say that Plasma will definitely hide passive SNIs, but =

according to this specification, developers should actually _expect_ =

visualizations to hide passive SNIs. So,  according to this specification, =

applications that rely on passive SNIs _not_ to be hidden are clearly doing=
 it =

wrong, and we could hit them over the head with the spec if they complain.

[1] http://www.notmart.org/misc/statusnotifieritem/statusnotifieritem.html

_______________________________________________
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]