unity-design team mailing list archive
-
unity-design team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #07537
Re: Unity improvement for vision loss people
ok, "default app" is a problematic concept.
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 01:42, Ian Santopietro <isantop@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I see.
>
> While this has merit, I don't think it's entirely relevant. What if I
> have two web browsers on my launcher? What if I don't have a default
> specified. The concept of differentiating an app as default is broken.
> There shouldn't be a default web browser, since it really doesn't
> matter.
_wwwbrowser_ as such is an application. It is first of all not a
manufacturer or a product, but an application.
The fact that one web-browser sucks so bad that i need 3 to feel safe is
the problem here, from my point of view.
The feature "freedom of choice" remains unaffected by this suggestion.
Opening a file from the file browser should follow the last
> used app.
>
remains the wording problem in the community.. what is "app" and is "app"
different from "application"? and what does "application" mean?
References
-
Unity improvement for vision loss people
From: Bartosz, 2012-01-06
-
Re: Unity improvement for vision loss people
From: Matt Wheeler, 2012-01-06
-
Re: Unity improvement for vision loss people
From: frederik.nnaji@xxxxxxxxx, 2012-01-08
-
Re: Unity improvement for vision loss people
From: Ian Santopietro, 2012-01-09
-
Re: Unity improvement for vision loss people
From: frederik.nnaji@xxxxxxxxx, 2012-01-09
-
Re: Unity improvement for vision loss people
From: Ian Santopietro, 2012-01-09
-
Re: Unity improvement for vision loss people
From: frederik.nnaji@xxxxxxxxx, 2012-01-09
-
Re: Unity improvement for vision loss people
From: Ian Santopietro, 2012-01-09
-
Re: Unity improvement for vision loss people
From: frederik.nnaji@xxxxxxxxx, 2012-01-11
-
Re: Unity improvement for vision loss people
From: Ian Santopietro, 2012-01-12