Re: a11y / D-Bus / lifecycle ...

Michael Meeks wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-12-18 at 15:55 +0800, Li Yuan wrote:
>   
>>>         Quite - me neither  OTOH,
it's a hard issue to fix: and
>>> precedent-wise, MSAA, IAcc2, UIA, UNO a11y and
atk use reference
>>> counting 
>>>       
>> Not sure if I understand this correctly. You are
talking about the
>> possibility for object lifecycle management in
D-Bus, right? Then could
>> we implement the Bonobo_Unknown interface in at-spi
to handle the
>> lifecycle problem?
>>     
>
> 	Yes; easily - but explicit lifecycle management is a
total nightmare
> for performance, efficiency, etc.
>
>   
Hi Li, Michael; 

I agree with Michael here, if we can figure out a way to get
rid of the 
cross-process lifecycle management (maybe client-side stubs
that 'die' 
gracefully, or something similar?) then it would be a good
thing. 
Perhaps the current changes are the right time to introduce
such a 
change, since other behavioral things would be sure to
change too.

Bill

> 	Regards,
>
> 		Michael.
>
>   

_______________________________________________
kde-accessibility mailing list
kde-accessibilitykde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-accessibility