Yes, that's the point, not to mix them. So two different contact providers separates the two different types of contacts.
If the other type of contact provider (not for personal contacts) called the Virtual Contacts Content Provider isn't provided, then developers have to make their own content provider for the users virtual (social space contacts, etc.) contacts that are part of their app. So it's either each app builds their own "virtual contacts" Content Provider -or- there is a standard Content Provider for these virtual contacts. So that's what I'm saying. On Aug 27, 4:43 pm, hackbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Aug 27, 1:26 pm, jtaylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Also to mention that there should be big differences. Such as that > > Virtual Contacts don't have a phone number. > > It sounds to me like you are talking about a different kind of content > provider, not the normal contacts provider. > > > You may press a button to > > put a virtual contact in your Personal Contacts though. Anyway, I > > think this is very important. This was an issue with the GTalkService > > problem I believe. But hopefully this will be in 1.0 because so many > > apps will use Virtual Contacts and not just Personal Contacts. > > No, there will be nothing like this in 1.0. As you've see, one of the > reasons why the GTalk data API was removed was because of the concern > of mixing these two kinds of people. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Announcing the new Android 0.9 SDK beta! http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2008/08/announcing-beta-release-of-android-sdk.html For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
