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

List:       kde-promo
Subject:    Re: [kde-promo] KDE Myths Facts Check
From:       Mihnea Capraru <mihnea_capraru () yahoo ! de>
Date:       2005-11-29 0:49:44
Message-ID: 200511290249.45057.mihnea_capraru () yahoo ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tuesday 29 November 2005 02:02, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> On Friday 25 November 2005 13:22, Mihnea Capraru wrote:
> > Aaron, you wrote a very expressive blog entry on KDE's FreeDesktop.org
> > involvement.
> > 
> > Could you please post a few headlines on this? Two or three main ideas, I
> > mean.  I feel this is a new myth and it needs handling, but I don't feel
> > entitled to just write a text from scratch on behalf of the community. 
> > > -)
> 
> according to FreeDesktop.org itself, the appearance of a specification or a
> piece of software on the FreeDesktop.org website or in its source
> repository does not make it a standard. when both KDE and GNOME adopt a
> specification or software implementaton then it becomes a defacto standard.
> 
> that said, not only does KDE support a large number of specifications and
> software found at FreeDesktop.org, KDE also has and continues to
> collaborate on their creation and authorship. there are many, many examples
> ranging from the icon theme spec to the clipboard agreements to the window
> manager hints to the menu and .desktop file specifications to X.org to ...
> 
> 
> now .... my personal issue with FD.o is that it does not do enough to set
> the above policy. it relies on the implicit acknowledgement and
> understanding of the above process, which is actually agreed on by all
> parties involved that matter. but because it's implicit, there are people
> who try and misuse that "standardization" system either out of malice,
> hubris or innocent ignorance. i find the disonnect between what the
> leadership in FD.o are willing to state publicly, the agreed upon
> mechanisms and the realities of what goes on to be unfortunate and
> unnecessary.
> 
> due to this personal opinion some have come to the conclusion i am
> anti-FD.o, which is fairly humourous given my historical position, both
> publicly as well as within KDE, on these things. i think this misconception
> is largely due to my position being a complex one (being critical of a
> process i support)

Thank you for the reply. I'll try to find a way to say this in a clear manner.

http://kdemyths.urbanlizard.com/myth/34 currently speaks about

"drag and drop, copy and paste, session management, application menus, 
mimetype associations, icon themes, system tray protocols, desktop files, 
image thumbnails and window manager hints"

This is quite an impressive list itself. Have other important things been 
standardized in the meanwhile?

I need such a list to prove to incredulous people that KDE really does care 
about fd.o.

Mihnea


	

	
		
___________________________________________________________ 
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 1GB Speicher kostenlos - Hier anmelden: \
http://mail.yahoo.de  
_______________________________________________
This message is from the kde-promo mailing list.

Visit https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-promo to unsubscribe, set digest on \
or temporarily stop your subscription.


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