From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Apr 29 5:25:23 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from assurance.rstcorp.com (assurance.rstcorp.com [206.29.49.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 909C814FAE for ; Thu, 29 Apr 1999 05:25:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from vshah@rstcorp.com) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by assurance.rstcorp.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA12908; Thu, 29 Apr 1999 08:21:54 -0400 Received: from sandbox.rstcorp.com(206.29.49.63) by assurance.rstcorp.com via smap (V2.0) id xma012905; Thu, 29 Apr 99 12:21:44 GMT Received: from jabberwock.rstcorp.com (jabberwock [206.29.49.98]) by sandbox.rstcorp.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA21505; Thu, 29 Apr 1999 08:20:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from vshah@localhost) by jabberwock.rstcorp.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) id IAA15363; Thu, 29 Apr 1999 08:20:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 08:20:16 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199904291220.IAA15363@jabberwock.rstcorp.com> From: "Viren R. Shah" To: Wes Peters Cc: Thomas David Rivers , darrylo@sr.hp.com, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Adding desktop support (please don't) In-Reply-To: <3727C7DA.F08AD1B4@softweyr.com> References: <199904290035.UAA18606@lakes.dignus.com> <3727C7DA.F08AD1B4@softweyr.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.34 under 19.16 "Lille" XEmacs Lucid Reply-To: "Viren R. Shah" X-Face: )~y+U*K:yzjz{q<5lzpI_SVef'U.])9g[C9`1N@]u3,MHY7f*l7C)[_NjM4y4K8$uIUh|\u (K&&HS6,M!61&GMTk'mqmB/Qg]]X}"?TzsFl]"2v!bl8']dma.:^IY^a[lbOI>U:b<~FyK3q-p{HmZ mn~g.`~BE!5{2D:}Yi+\_KkWe?XaHj9$ko1k8iKLYv5*_2c8"G=?Up[}hn+7RNM(bzBZ_wWk6!Pf&B ?3Tcm7M7B~W%K/I0aX3]*=jP?aM]H6HBPT`oLk+0n^_;N\2\%|Rhy;p}34Q.jEsM\qtnxcm;ag%Nq Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >>>>> "Wes" == Wes Peters writes: Wes> This entire discussion seems to have skipped over an important concept: Wes> is the icon an attribute of the executable, or an attribute of the Wes> file manager? This is a point that is often missed, especially by the Wes> microserfs in Redmond. I think the icons are more an attribute of the Wes> file manager, they are a virtual view of the file rather than an Wes> attribute of the file. The response that mentioned heir(7) was precisely Wes> right; UNIX already has a way of handling this situation and we should Wes> use and extend THAT appropriately. I think you missed the original point. You are talking about icons as seen representing an application in a desktop. What the original proposal seemed to be was to include data associated with that application (in this case the only data suggested was an icon). Look at the demo application (filedemo) that was presented. It *uses* the icons to display a file hierarchy. The icons embedded within it are not used when the application is minimised -- that's a function of my window manager. I would like to hear arguments against "data" being embedded -- not window manager icons, which has been a perpetual strawman since this thread began. Viren -- Viren R. Shah, viren @ rstcorp . com, http://www.rstcorp.com/~vshah/ If you understand what you're doing, you are not learning anything To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message