Re: Finding and Reminding, tech issues, 3.0 and beyond


>   There are two basic approaches here - one is to avoid storing
>   things on the Desktop. Instead of seeing the Desktop as a separate
>   location in the file selector, you'd have a checkbox:
>    [ ] Pin to Desktop
>   (or whatever the designers come up with), and that would create
>   a symlink to the desktop.
>   The other approach is when expiring or archiving to move files
>   from ~/Desktop to an archival location like ~/Documents.

The pinning should be done automatically and the files should stay in
the place I saved them (e.g. a firefox download should end up in
~/Downloads and OO.o should default to ~/Documents. The recent files
should be stored by pinning on the "Desktop".
> "Timeline view of files"
>   For items that aren't on the desktop (the "slip") the default view
>   is a chronological one with "yesterday", "last week", and so
>   forth. So we need to be able to organize user's files this way.
>   One approach is to keep track of user accesses and edits via
>   Zeitgeist (or in simplifed form by ~/.recently-used.xbel)
>   The other approach would be to treataccess/edit time a
>   metadata property, and to use tracker to search over these
>   properties.
>   (Note that the timeline here only includes each item once,
>   not once for each usage - I use "timeline" somewhat differently
>   below)

Why would the timeline only include each items once? I really would like
to see the activity journal here as it is so much more like people
remember things.
>  * Using Tracker to extract and index metadata from files is
>    pretty uncontroversial. Using Tracker as the primary store
>    of information (such as tags) is more controversial - suddenly
>    the user's data is dependent on the use of Tracker.

I doubt the latter is a good idea currently.

> Concerns and thoughts concerning Zeitgeist:   
>    The only think I can think of in the current mockups
>    that requires a Zeitgeist-like approach is the
>    "Frequent" selector. Without a longitudinal view
>    of usage, it's hard to answer "what are the most frequently 
>    used documents in the last 30 days".

See above, why not use the activity-journal?
>  * To a much greater extent than tracker, Zeitgeist is
>    is designed to require applications to be modified to
>    push events to it.

Well, not entirely. You CAN provide extra data for zeitgeist but all
applications that support Recent Files at least work ok.
>  * Zeitgeist is designed to be standalone and independent
>    from Tracker, but also used in conjunction. This, at
>    times, makes things not as good as they could be. For
>    example, Tracker has a pretty sophisticated system to
>    assign a UID to each file and track files as they
>    move around the file system, but Zeitgeist, which
>    identifies file by file paths will lose a file as
>    soon as it is moved - it doesn't piggyback off the
>    work that Tracker is doing.

That should probably be fixed in zeitgeinst (or it should listen to
tracker for such changes). It's a bug more or less.

> Not much yet - I think it will definitely be hard to implement
> our ideas without something that looks a lot like Tracker, and 
> since we have Tracker something that looks a lot like Tracker 
> is most likely Tracker :-) Zeitgeist seems less centrally crucial, 
> but there is a role for event logging here. 

Some of the more advanced search technologies really need tracker, I
agree here. I am not sure if we want to depend on it hard for 3.0 but
that can be discussed.
But as said above I really want to have the activity journal available
inside the shell as I think it is beside the shell another central point
for 3.0

Most important would be to come up with a plan what we have in 3.0 and
what we might have in 3.2 as I doubt anything will be ready by the time
3.0 is released.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]