Re: Changes 2009-07-15/16 in branch?

[Harald Hanche-Olsen <hanche@math.ntnu.no>]

+ Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>:

>     Most? I don't think so. Small and simple apps generally don't, bigger
>     and more sophisticated ones generally do. Apple's own apps are more
>     likely to have provide services, but many non-Apple ones do, such as
>     Emacs (duh), LaTeXit, Opera, Quicksilver, Skim, Skype.
> 
> "Provide services" is somewhat cryptic.  Which services does that refer to?

Note that every application on the mac uses the menu bar at the top of
the screen. Drop down menus at the menu bar, starting from the left,
are the Apple menu (mostly for system-wide stuff), the application
menu, and whatever other menu items the app might provide (File and
Edit usually come next).

In the application menu of every application there is a submenu called
Services. And the Services menu has a submenu for every app that
actually does provide a service (some apps provide only one service,
in which case the submenu is dispensed with)

The usual way to use a service provided by another app is to select
something with the mouse, be it text, graphics or a more complicated
object, and then select the desired service from the menu. The other
app will receive the selected stuff and do something with it.

Services provided by Emacs are these four:

  Email selection (i.e., put the selection in the body of a new message)
  New buffer containing selection
  Open selected file (the selection had better name a file)
  Send mail to selected address

A semirandom selection of services offered by other applications:

  Open URL
  Make new Applescript
  Run as Applescript
  Send file to bluetooth device
  Add contact (Skype)
  Call (Skype)
  Send SMS (Skype)

>     Relatively few apps have the capability of sending user supplied
>     Applescript commands to other apps, but I would suggest keeping that
>     capability, since it strengthens Emacs' position as a useful tool on
>     the Mac. (Though one could get much the same functionality by running
>     osascript as an external command.)
> 
> It seems to me that this is precisely the sort of thing we should
> avoid, since it is a feature limited to a proprietary system and not
> even most programs on that system have it.

I for one won't lose any sleep if it goes away, for as I said one can
always run osascript as an external program. If others disagree, they
will surely speak up.

- Harald