Re: Can epiphany give a handler list when downloading files

[Raphaël Slinckx <raphael slinckx net>]

Hi !

> In my opinion, for a file of specific type, opening it with the
> default handler would not be enough, since different handlers have
> different significant characters.  Even in nautilus, the example
> provided by you, users can open a file with default application but
> also with another one in the `open with' list.  If only the default
> one is enougth, why the `open with' items exist?
> 

I agree on the theorical "need" of a list of handlers vs. a single
default handler. However, i just don't see a common example of when such
a thing could happen while downloading things on the net. The most
common documents you retreive are plain-text/code/etc (displayed in
epihany anyway), PDF documents (and no i don't need having to choose
from xpdf evince, ggv, gpdf and so on, the one i choose in nautilus is
perfect), and compressed archives which usualy are downloaded instead of
viewed (even then you usually don't have 3 archive managers you use).

So it's not much a question of is it needed or not, but when and how
often would it be useful.

> Moreover, giving a list for selection would not confuse users, because
> it is a default configuration for many Gnome applications, for
> example, evolution and so on.  In evolution, users can decide how to
> deal with an attachment, instead of only default handler.
> 

You may label me as an extremist, but i find evolution should only give
save as and view with default handler, like epiphany does now (more or
less). The more you add to an interface the more you have to think
before clicking, which is a bad thing, i find :)

Nautilus on the other hand is the heart of file management and as such
it's useful it provides multiple choice on what to do with the file. For
example you have an html file, well it makes sense to choose in nautilus
wheter to view it or open it in gedit, for example.

> In fact, even in mozilla/firefox, the users have the ability to select
> handler.  But just because it does not integrate in desktop
> environment, a user have to select another application by browsing the
> file system manually.  It's too confused in fact.
> 

Granted, firefox is not integrated with gnome desktop, and as such has
an awful interface to the underlying native system.

One more thing: now when it presents you a dialog you have two choices,
open the document, or dismiss the dialog. Simple and straightforward.
Imagine you have now a dialog with a list, you now have to make three
decisions: open it ? how to open it ? or dismiss, the how to open it
comes against the flow of tought when you actually wanted to view the
thing.

Do not take me too seriously, though, i'm not a real epiphany
developper :)

Raf