[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    RE: [Fwd: kparts]
From:       David Faure <David.Faure () cramersystems ! com>
Date:       1999-11-04 13:44:12
[Download RAW message or body]

> On Thu, 4 Nov 1999, weis wrote:
> [...]
> > In KDE components are historically called "parts" :-)
> 
> :-)
> 
> > KOfficeView would NOT be derived from the ReadWrite 
> Component interface.
> > 
> > A KOfficeWrapper would be and that wrapper in return owns a 
> KoDocument
> > and a KoView then.
> > 
> > I think most of the code in "Part" has to move to KoDocument and
> > lots of the "View" and "ContainerView" has to go to a new 
> class KoView.
> > 
> > I think one thing was not explained clear enough by me:
> > KOffice will "internally"! not use the new embedding stuff. It will
> > use KLibLoader and KLibfactory and such but NOT the ReadWrite Component
> > stuff. There will just be a class KOfficeWrapper which makes Koffice
> > components appear like usual KDE components.
> 
> *nod* *nod* :-)
> 
> > Bye
> > Torben
> > 
> > BTW: Why not deriving KDE Component from QWidget? Where is the problem
> > with it having a save method? IMHO no need to invent a new class just
> > to have no save method on a QWidget derived class.
Sure, I didn't ask for an additionnal class. Just for a new name :)

> That's exactly how the KParts class in my local disk looks like :)
> KParts inherits QWidget, and KReadOnlyPart, derived from 
> KParts, has an openURL method.
> 
> Is that fine with you? (David/Torben/*)

Fine with me.

> If noone objects and if noone started before, then I'd commit my skeleton
> stuff this evening. (or perhaps earlier, that depends on how fast this uni
> computer compiles ;-)
> 
> Ciao,
> Simon
Simon : a Reply-To field, again ? :)


--
David Faure
faure@kde.org - KDE developer
david@mandrakesoft.com - Mandrake
david.faure@cramersystems.com - Cramer Systems

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]