Hi Gary!

Thanks a lot for your work on this.

I fully agree that the D-Bus version of AT-SPI should use the IDL. We want to 
make the migration as easy as possible.

Some additional thoughts:
* It is impossible to run two registries in parallel because of the way XEvie 
is written. Maybe it makes more sense to have a registry that can speak both 
CORBA and D-Bus (via modules). Does the current CORBA AT-SPI registry code 
support a move to D-Bus?

* There is a compiler that generates various D-Bus bindings from an XML 
description. If it is possible to express the whole IDL in D-Bus 
Introspection XML, then we would get bindings for all languages and toolkits 
supported by D-Bus. Otherwise it might perhaps be possible to reuse code.

Olaf

-- 
Olaf Jan Schmidt, KDE Accessibility co-maintainer, open standards 
accessibility networker, Protestant theology student and webmaster of 
http://accessibility.kde.org/ and http://www.amen-online.de/
_______________________________________________
kde-accessibility mailing list
kde-accessibility@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-accessibility