Re: GNOME & KOM/OP

[Elliot Lee <sopwith redhat com>]

On Mon, 10 Aug 1998, Stefan Westerfeld wrote:

> Remember that the descision is not only about technical superiority.
> It's a descision that will dictate the way linux users work with
> their applications in the future.
> 
> Considering this, a common object model is IMHO worth much much more
> than two different. So the little technical issues regarding KOM/OP
> should be worth nothing against the gain of making all KDE and Gnome
> apps interoperable in near future.

Which could possibly be translated
"Screw yourself over with a crappy document object model, because we use
it". 

Although I don't not agree with the KOM/OP design, I do not mean to
denigrate the contribution that you've made. Since I'm not in tune with
KDE development, I can't fully appreciate the issues involved with the
KOM/OP design as it relates to KDE as a whole.

At the same time, technical issues _are_ important for the GNOME project,
and we intend to do this in a technically correct fashion, because we have
the opportunity to do so, and "doing it right" is an important part of
making GNOME happen :) From this viewpoint, KOM/OP doesn't cut it.

Good design does not exclude interoperability, but please compare the
technical merits of KOM/OP to those of other document object models
(OpenDoc, OLE, DOM, etc.), and then try to realize why KOM/OP is not a
viable solution for us. 

-- Elliot
Do you ever just feel thankful that you know me and have access to my
dementia? Explain. Be prepared to discuss in class.