- From: Bill Haneman <bill haneman sun com>
- To: Michael Meeks <michael ximian com>
- Cc: Murray Cumming Comneon com, gnome-accessibility-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: cspi-1.0?
- Date: 12 May 2003 13:15:17 +0100
On Mon, 2003-05-12 at 12:49, Michael Meeks wrote:
> Hi Bill,
> On Fri, 2003-05-09 at 16:33, Bill Haneman wrote:
> > libcspi is part of at-spi.
> Seeing that makes me wonder whether we should (perhaps) deprecated the
> 'libspi' API, since it seems no-one uses it and it'd perhaps be nice to
> not be concerned about changing it in future ?
Not sure what you mean. If you mean public export of libspi's
BonoboObject implementation code, I agree that these interfaces should
be private to the at-spi package. However libspi is primarily intended
as implementation code for the at-spi IDL, which is the key public API
for at-spi. The cspi library, though important to current clients, is
just a convenience wrapper.
However there may be reason to keep the libspi listener implementation
code available for C or C++ clients that don't want to use cspi.
I am not sure what you mean by "deprecation" of libspi really; as you
say we aren't really recommending direct use of libspi's methods (with
the possible exception of the listener code) by clients. However I
don't know how we can enforce a "at-spi internals only" policy for
access to the library's symbols.
> Thoughts ?
> mmeeks gnu org <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
> gnome-accessibility-list mailing list
> gnome-accessibility-list gnome org
] [Thread Prev