drago01 wrote: > On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> 1. Many features are optional: >> http://www.galago-project.org/specs/notification/0.9/x408.html#command-get-capabilities >> and not supported by all implementations. In particular, some >> implementations (e.g. Plasma) allow action buttons/links on >> notifications, others (like, AFAIK, GNOME Shell and Unity) don't. So if >> you rely on actions on the notification, be warned that your program will >> not work properly everywhere. [...] > > Not sure about Unity but they work fine in GNOME. So that "no actions" nonsense is just a Unity thing? Good to know. > But anyway the "D-Bus-based status notifier protocol" does not mandate > anything about how things should be presented to the user at all, > so if you want "the exact same user experience" you can't recommend them > either. > > If I recall correctly this vague spec was the primary reason for lack > of adoption in GNOME not because it is "buggy". That was the excuse for not supporting the spec in GNOME Shell: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xdg/2010-January/011228.html A very bad excuse, considering that, as I pointed out, the spec GNOME proposes using instead (the Galago spec) is worse when it comes to that! The "buggy" excuse was given for not supporting libappindicator in the client applications: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-February/161992.html Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
