Konqueror 4

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On Monday 30 October 2006 4:23, David Faure wrote:
> On Mon Oct 30 2006, Mark Rose wrote:
> > As just a KDE user, I don't see the paradigms as so fundamentally
> > different. I see Konqueror as a visual file accessing program. What's so
...
> That was the kde3 konqueror idea indeed. But it turns out that by having
> everything into the same application we end up with a large mess, where

and just so it isn't mistaken for all being a waste exercise: i think we -did- 
learn that eliminating the "local vs remote" issue by simply not caring so 
much does work. that many of the tools that evolved (e.g. servicemenus, 
various file views, etc) were very, very useful. that tabs in filemanagers 
actually do make sense (would we have tried that if we hadn't also used it 
for a web browser?)... etc... so we learned lots of "Do"s along with 
the "Don't"s IMHO.

> Not everything can be "seamlessly integrated" between file-management and
> web-browsing. Configuration is one good example of that: file management
..
> filemanagement bookmarks, but those should be made separate, which even
...
> The part where I'm not sure is the document viewer embedding functionality.

yes, yes and yes =)

> url in a filemanager window. Currently you get the webpage next to your
> directory-tree sidebar, which kind of sucks ;). With separate programs we
> could simply open a webbrowsing window when typing Enter.
... 
> And vice-versa, we can open a filemanager window when typing a
> directory-like url (local or remote) in a web window.

i'm not sure we need to open a file manager for local urls. perhaps the 
browser can be allowed to be more "free form" for the user (which "browsing", 
at least in english, implies anyways) while the manager is more purposeful 
and therefore focused (which is also implied by the english word used: 
manager)

i suppose the defining difference should be "protocols which can allow for 
modification" (even if the actual permissions on the given item don't). which 
means media, locally mounted file systems, remote protocols that support 
writing (smb, fish, nfs, webdav) can all be shown directly in the file 
manager. 

whereas view-only, or browsing, protocols would open in the browser. this 
means http (even though you can send data using it, but that's a different 
concept than altering what you are viewing being supported by the protocol), 
applications:/, settings:/ .... those would all open in the browser.

does that make sense?

let me see what i can whip up for testing purposes  while working on better 
non-local support in the dolphin urlnavigator. 

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo
humru othro a kohnu se
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43

Full time KDE developer sponsored by Trolltech (http://www.trolltech.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mail.kde.org/mailman/private/kfm-devel/attachments/20061030/4096ed33/attachment.sig>