[GUI] Mission Statement + Widgets
Wed, 5 Mar 2003 10:47:27 +0000
On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 12:57:48PM -0800, David Sankel wrote:
> I would like to clarify my opinion. I would
> strongly suggest to _not_ use Qt as a backend
> primarily to license issues. I suggested using the Qt
> feature-set as a goal feature-set.
If there is somebody who wants to write a binding to Qt then that is not
a problem. As far as I remember you were about the only one who endorsed
As Simon said, we want to have a spec that is implementable. The only
way to ensure this is to propose some functionality, implement it on all
backends mentioned in the document and then mark it as stable when
it worked out for all backends. That is the only reason I included the
list of backends. If there is no one to write a binding to Qt right now,
then Qt has to be removed from the list.
That doesn't preclude writing a binding to backends not in the list. But
such an effort will not influence the spec anymore. So if there are people
out there who are willing to write backends for other platforms: now is
the time to add them to the report.
> I think that sound api should be of low priority
> (aside from the simple windows asterix like sounds
> when a dialogue pops up).
I put sound and printing at the very bottom of the list which should mean
they have a low priority. I can remove them if other people think this is
out of scope but I sense that this effort is nothing that has a definite
end but can go on for quite a long time.
> Regarding GIO, I am very interested and it seems
> like the way to go. I can't find it on the internet
> though. Can someone give me a link so I may review
Search for GIO on sourceforge.net.
> I would suggest putting aside the MDI SDI questions
> for now, and work on defining a widget set.
But we need to know how to set up a main window before we put any widgets
in it, don't we? I can imagine that once we are past this stage, adding
widgets will be quick and simple.
I adjusted your comment on Qt.