Re: [Deskbar] Match/Action display string
- From: "Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen" <mikkel kamstrup gmail com>
- To: "Sebastian Pölsterl" <marduk k-d-w org>
- Cc: deskbar-applet-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: [Deskbar] Match/Action display string
- Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 22:58:03 +0200
2007/9/28, Sebastian Pölsterl <
marduk k-d-w org>:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen schrieb:
> Why is the string displayed by a match != string displayed by default
> action? I know you can enforce this in each module, but it seems quite odd.
>
The match stands for the object that has been found (e.g. a file or a
e-mail). Therefore, get_name() should return the name of this object.
Actions on the other hand do something with this object. Most of the
time the description of a action is more complex than that of a match.
> For 2.22 I suggest we simply scrap Match.get_name() and display the default
> Action instead.
>
If a match has only one action "get_name() & get_verb()" of the action
will displayed in the results. If it has more than one action match's
get_name() will be displayed.
In my opinion it's confusing when the description of the default action
is displayed. If more actions available it seems that the action has
more actions. But on the other hand: when only the name of the match is
displayed how should the user know what the default action is?
>
> PS: The Action api also has richer formatting options. Match only has
> get_name() while Action have the old style get_name/get_verb combo.
>
That's intended, because the name of a match (get_name) should be static
and not require any fancy formatting. Whereas actions are more complex.
Hmm... I think it is a difference in how the Match/Action relation is understood that is the root of my confusion.
My idea was that Actions was extra functionality you could add to a match, while I understand from your explanation that a match with a set of actions is merely a placeholder for those actions...
Showing the default actions makes sense in from my view, but from your view (as I understand it) I guess it makes sense to display something else.
Cheers,
Mikkel
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]