According to Paul Rohr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >For example, the encoding manager sits in XAP but, as other current > >threads attest, encoding is a fundamental part of AbiWord, and should > >probably sit in UT... > > I think you may misunderstand the roles of UT and XAP. > > UT = low-level utilities > XAP = application services used by more than one Abi* application > > Thus, in theory the UT stuff would be usable without any XAP or AP logic, > although to date nobody has wanted to.
UT* stuff should not depend on GUI stuff. For UNIX that means no dependency over GTK. glib is Okay. > In practice the line between the two can seem a bit arbitrary. However, in > principle the UT library should stay lower-level, whereas the XAP modules > are a lightweight framework for doing native GUI applications (AbiWord, > AbiCalc, AbiShow, etc.). > > Would moving the encoding stuff down to UT make standalone use of that > library more useful for someone right now? If not, it seems like an awful > lot of work and confusion. Encoding should have a large part into XAP. One of the reasons is that encoding should provide real glyph remapping like Mozilla does. We should also write real XAP font management (currently it is a real mess, and I discover that with the Mac port as each platform seems to go its own way). Hub
