Re: [rox-devel] Re: [patch] rox_gnomevfs.diff (new version)

[Jesper O. <jo...@po...>]

Hi
On Sun, 2002-02-24 at 07:43, Jim Knoble wrote:
> Circa 2002-Feb-23 11:13:10 +0100 dixit Jesper Overgaard:
> 
> : While there is hardly any doubt that the database of MIME-types should
> : be shared, the MIME-handler database may be another issue. On one hand I
> : find it frustrating to have both a ROX and a GNOME database of
> : MIME-actions, when I use GNOME-apps with ROX. On the other hand it may
> : be convenient, that each desktop has its own database so I get a
> : GNOME-app when running GNOME or a KDE-app when running KDE (which I
> : never do).
> 
> I suspect that many users don't care whether an app associated with a
> particular file type "belongs" to GNOME or KDE or GNUstep or anything
> else.  Rather, i suspect they want to (a) use an app that works, and
> (b) know which apps "should" work and be able to choose among them.
> 
> I think the best thing is for *all* installed apps which support a
> given file type to be available by opening a file of that type.  If
> more than one such app is installed, i should be offered all of them.
> until (and unless) i choose a default.  The list would still be
> available via an 'Open With' menu or a similar mechanism.
I certainly agree with that. But still I think there might be cases,
where the default action should depend on the destop being used, as I
for instance think is the case with image viewers og html viewers. Here
it would make sense to use a viewer "belonging" to the current desktop
because it offers the best integration. On the other hand there are
cases where the user probably wants the default action to be shared by
all desktops. If I for instance have chosen Abiword and not Startoffice
as the default handler for Word-files, it is probably because I want
something quick and light, and this is probably independent of the
desktop being used. So it's not easy, I think!

> This way, instead of acting arrogant enough to "know" what the user
> wants, the computer gives the user enough information to make an
> informed decision; the computer becomes obedient servant instead of
> "benevolent" master....
Yes, this is what we (and all others) should be aiming for!

Regards

Jesper