Hi Aaron, thanks for your reply. Le dimanche 6 août 2006 21:47, Aaron J. Seigo a écrit : > On Sunday 06 August 2006 10:30, Olivier Goffart wrote:
> by keeping the data coupled to the view, you will never be able to > experiment too wildly with views and uses of that data because the effort > of doing so will be too high. > > this approach also introduces complexity in the form of having to manage > both data and view in one place. the complexity of the MV approach is party > a perception thing due to being new (meaning we have to learn things) and > only partly due to actually being more complex. I think understand this. But I think this is already the case in Kopete, without the need of a QAbstactItemModel stuff and all theses QModelIndex. Or what's the difference ? (I'm asking to Matt, Michel and Michaël) > > Note that our storage data is already separated from it's representation > > in the Kopete::ContactList > > and the contactlist data structure ought to be able to feed directly into > views. What do you mean ? > one of the use cases kopete will run into is being able to bridge the > contact data to lists that appear on the desktop or in other applications. > identity is moving more and more towards sharing and coordinating this data > between multiple apps. And that's one important topics. But I fail to see how QAbstractItemModel helps. What we need here is a defined dbus interface.
pgp57QIKbI84X.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ kopete-devel mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kopete-devel
