Re: Pluggable widget types and implementations

[Bill Haneman <Bill Haneman Sun COM>]

Hi All;

As I understand it, the proposal below would probably break gail 
unless/until we roll it into gtk+.  While gail currently uses public 
gtk+ API to fulfill the ATK implementations, it relies rather heavily on 
the details of the existing implementation.

I think this would force the issue of gail->gtk+ integration if and when 
it happens.  The first stage of the gail->gtk+ work is under way, with a 
patch in process to move gnomecanvas accessibility support from gail 
into libgnome-canvas, thus removing the only known dependency blocker in 
this respect.

Best regards,

Bill

...
>   
> > On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 14:53 +0100, Tim Janik wrote:
> >     
> > > Hey all,
> > >
> > > this is a proposal for allowing pluggable widget types and implementations,
> > > assorted bug report: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=356864
> > >       
> > How about a sort of widget/object factory?
> >
> > So you'd set the default implementation for a type:
> >  gtk_object_factory_set_default_implementation (factory,
> >                                                 GTK_TYPE_LABEL,
> >                                                 MY_CUSTOM_LABEL_TYPE);
> >
> > And then in the widget/object xxx_new() functions instead of calling
> > g_object_new() they call:
> >  gtk_object_factory_create (factory, GTK_TYPE_LABEL, ...);
> >