Re: Generic Embeddable plugins.

> On Fri, 2005-01-14 at 10:43 +1100, msevior@physics.unimelb.edu.au wrote:
>
>> They would simply use the snapshot (either png or svg).
>
> I preview to use the word "preview". It is less confusing.
>
>>
>> Jean can implement an embed bonobo-component plugin,
>> I can write a MathML plugin,
>> Dom can write netscape-plugin, plugin
>> A KDE dev could write a K-parts plugin.
>>
>> If the plugin is not available, you use the snapshot. I see no reason
>> why
>> Jean writing a bonobo-plugin should hurt OSX or Windows.
>
> OK. I'm not sure we think of it the right we. We must integrate in our
> framework, in the XP side, infrastructure for embedding, and then
> provide in the platform code, binding to the platform embedding. That
> would mean OLE2 on Windows, Bonobo on GNOME, nothing on Gtk-only, and
> nothing on MacOS X unles we find someting, because MacOS X is really
> retarded on that matter.
>
> This is not a plugin. This IN AbiWord. And this is the route to follow.
>

OK I see what you're saying now.

From my perspective this IS the way we allow cross platfrom out-of-mem
embedding of objects.

The XP code is in place (well almost on my laptop now :-) to display
embedded content. We write plugins enable it.

I'm not smart enough to come up with my own XP embedding framework. We
could steal Mozilla's or OOo's. Maybe we should have that discussion.

I don't particularly like either myself.

Cheers

Martin

>
> Hub
> --
> Crazy French - http://www.figuiere.net/hub/
>
>
Received on Fri, 14 Jan 2005 11:15:50 +1100 (EST)