[g-a-devel] Fwd: Re: [Kde-accessibility] Re: KDE and AT-SPI [was: Re: Is it the time for "KSpeach"?]

On September 15, 2004 12:04, Bill Haneman wrote:
> the same, I have a concern, which I think is very realistic, that if you
> implement all the features you need for a truly object-oriented,
> network-capable object protocol, you will have more-or-less
> reimplemented CORBA.

except that the overwhelming majority of desktop applications don't need a
"truly object oriented, network capable object protocol" of the magnitude of
CORBA. look at DCOP, which has been far and away more successful in achieving
its goals than the available CORBA based concepts. and examine the reasons
why DBUS is being developed rather using CORBA.

> At least with CORBA we have a real, pre-existing
> standard, and interoperability with other ORBs.

has this ever been a useful asset in terms of accessability and ATK in
particular to date? theoretical benefits don't really count, but if it has
proved useful, bully.

DBUS will likely give us interoperability this same interoperability in a
right-size container. i agree that we shouldn't jump projects such as the
accessability frameworks onto it until it is Ready(tm), but i do think it is
useful to understand why DBUS is needed and to state "these are the N bullet
points we need covered for it to be useful for us". this is how we can work
towards unified, useful technologies =)

Aaron J. Seigo
Society is Geometric

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]