Judson Valeski wrote:
> My general reaction to nsI*Observer interfaces is that they should be balled
> into nsIObserver using observer topics. In this world, the methods you've hung
> off of nsIHistoryObserver would each become topics. If we want to encapsulate
> the history specific "actions" in a specific interface (nice and neat) maybe we
> should call them "notifications" (nsIHistoryNotification?).? Or
> nsIHistoryListener, yea, maybe "listener."
I prefer a specific notification/listener interface rather than using the topics
based nsIObserver item.
