Re: buildable vs plain objects

[Torsten Schoenfeld <kaffeetisch gmx de>]

On 26.09.2010 02:50, Kevin Ryde wrote:
> > Implementing GtkBuildable is only necessary if you want to customize
> > the construction, I think.
>
> Perhaps the docs could be chopped, rather radically, to something like
> below.

Looks good to me, thanks.  Committed.

> Perhaps synopsis bit could show how ADD_CHILD lets you do interesting
> things with<child>  sub-objects, or in some way emphasise the good
> things Buildable can do or is needed for.

That might be good, yes.  The current synopsis program doesn't even need 
to implement the Gtk2::Buildable interface (so I removed this line).