Re: Again: please clarify the decision on IBus integration

[Rui Tiago Cação Matos <tiagomatos gmail com>]

On 9 July 2012 16:27, Aron Xu <aronxu gnome org> wrote:
> I know your wish is good, so I said it looks elegant. But in real
> world it's not that easy to add another layer of abstraction as "input
> sources" here.

Why? Can you please elaborate on this?

> First of all, IMF is actually almost what you think as
> "input sources", and XKB may be a part of it. In this way users can
> switch between German XKB and Chinese (Pinyin) without problem because
> they are all under the management of the IMF. Such kind of work has
> been their for long in IBus, as you may know ibus-xkb.

I do know about ibus-xkb and fcitx seems to also be growing that kind
of functionality. I just don't agree that that makes sense in an
integrated environment such as GNOME. Does GNOME offload its printer
settings to some external component? What about its display device
settings (monitor setups, resolution)? So why should we do it for
"input sources"?

IMO, IM engines are useful to translate/compose symbols from user
input and an IM framework is useful so that we don't need to have
different code for each of Chinese, Japanese, Korean or others. But it
ends there. If you start offloading keybindings and other
configurations then how do you make sure that the UI will be
consistent with the remaining GNOME UI?

Rui