Well… I think the context menu should be diferente for each file type in Tracker. The justification is simple: if you use the file system for e-mail, contacts (im_kit) and so on, then you need to have customized menus for each file type, to do specific thinks with each object.
I would like to “reply this e-mail”, without having to open the e-mail item and click reply… something like that.
I know, I know… this could lead to a Windows similarity and could use much more memory than acceptable, but it’s already done at some point (for mp3 files for example, is loaded a specific menu, but it’s in the window menu, not the context).
The file types interface could be the place where you register what kind of action you would like to do with each file. Nowadays, we got just some “relationship to the this kind of data” (can handle, cannot handle, …)
Extending this idea, the application itself could countain what actions it can do with which type of data. I don’t know what can be done to accomplish it (like change the executable structures or even create a kit for that, I really dunno), but the idea just don’t go away.
Maybe somebody out there could think in something more appropriate.
What you describe is mostly the concept of Add-Ons. Special programs that can do something with a specific file-type. Since the latest OpenTracker / Tracker.NewFS releases the Add-On section is MIME-Type based. That means that you can tell each Add-On what MIME-Types it can handle and when you click on a file, only the Add-Ons that can handle this specific type are shown (general ones that don’t have a list of supporting types are shown below a separator).
By the way, the extra menu for MP3’s is in the attribute menu and allows to display columns for the extra attributs. This is the case for all MIME-Types. If you have e-Mails in a folder, there will be an entry for this MIME-Type too. You can set what extra attributes a file-type should have in the FileTypes preferences
Since the latest OpenTracker / Tracker.NewFS releases the Add-On section is MIME-Type based. That means that you can tell each Add-On what MIME-Types it can handle and when you click on a file, only the Add-Ons that can handle this specific type are shown (general ones that don't have a list of supporting types are shown below a separator).
Believe or not, it never came to my attention :!: (specific for each file type)... I'm not a big fan of add-ons...
and
mmlr wrote:
By the way, the extra menu for MP3's is in the attribute menu and allows to display columns for the extra attributs. This is the case for all MIME-Types. If you have e-Mails in a folder, there will be an entry for this MIME-Type too. You can set what extra attributes a file-type should have in the FileTypes preferences
What you describe is mostly the concept of Add-Ons. Special programs that can do something with a specific file-type. Since the latest OpenTracker / Tracker.NewFS releases the Add-On section is MIME-Type based. That means that you can tell each Add-On what MIME-Types it can handle and when you click on a file, only the Add-Ons that can handle this specific type are shown (general ones that don't have a list of supporting types are shown below a separator).
By the way, the extra menu for MP3's is in the attribute menu and allows to display columns for the extra attributs. This is the case for all MIME-Types. If you have e-Mails in a folder, there will be an entry for this MIME-Type too. You can set what extra attributes a file-type should have in the FileTypes preferences
I do not se any difference to what you describe and an Add-On.
Except maby that the Add-On shows up in a sub-menu in the Context menu. If that relly is the proplem then maby the NewFS.Tracker dev can fix that for you quite easaly.
An option maby?
(I am afraid this would make the context menu very messy thoug…)
Something I really hate in Windows is when applications pollute the options menu. Right click on an mp3 and get “Open with Dreamweaver.” Of course if it were mime based it shouldn’t present that option (if it is set up properly) but it could add too many options if everything were presented on the first menu.
Personally, I love the add-ons. The only ones which are presented are the ones expected to work with the file in question, they are easilly controlled by the user and they stay out of your way until you call them up.
I’m sorry. I wasn’t a “hardcore” user of Add-ons and today I think the way they are implemented is excelent. Is EXACTLY the same concept I described, but under a submenu, what is PERFECT from my way of thinking.
Almost FOUR years to realize that… IQ should be ~ 50 :oops: