bert wrote: > > Am 23.10.2008 um 15:33 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > > bert wrote: > >> Am 23.10.2008 um 15:15 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > >> > >>> an addition to activity.info, with sensible defaults, would be the > >>> best bet, i think. > >> > >> This would mean that sometimes the shell and sometimes the activity > >> would have to handle that key, which is fragile. I'd opt for the > >> shell > >> always handling the key, then trying to invoke the activity's view > >> source function, and if that fails, handle it itself. > >> > >> That "not handled by activity" case could of course be customized by > >> entries in activity.info. > > > > sure, that's fine. but i think we need to keep thinking about > > how to support of non-, or not-fully-sugarized applications with > > every new feature we do (as well as with every revision of old > > features). > > Right. Hence the fallback to the default viewer if the activity does > not implement that (or any) DBus method. Or did I misunderstand you?
sorry i wasn't more clear -- we're in complete agreement. (it was when you said "add a method to the dbus activity protocol" that you pushed my "Must Defend Traditional Apps" button. :-) paul =--------------------- paul fox, [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
