On 18 Jun 2001 14:55:41 -0300, Sergio A. Kessler wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jon Trowbridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> > On 18 Jun 2001 13:44:06 -0300, Sergio A. Kessler wrote:
> > > interoperability and accesibility, that are the keys...
> > > (sure, is not that easy)
> >
> > One thing to keep in mind is that Evolution provides CORBA interfaces
> > and helper libraries to allow you to manipulate the addressbook. So the
> > analogy with MS's .doc format isn't really accurate...
>
> word also provides COM servers for manipulate a .doc
> is that a solution for abiword ? nope...
>
> maybe the analogy isn't good, but I don't see pine supporting corba
> anytime soon, on the contrary I easily see it supporting a vcard
> based format.
>
> > it will always be
> > possible to write scripts that access and/or manipulate the addressbook
> > contents, irregardless of what format Evolution is using to store it.
>
> yup, but trough evolution...
> you are doing the contrary of what standards bodies (like w3c) are doing,
> ie. they define a format, leaving the access implementation to authors
The w3c analogy is not a valid one. They are defining interoperation
protocols, not database storage formats.
Formats like xml are simply not suitable for storing random access
databases in. I know people have done it (e.g. xml) but that is just
bizarre and messed up and wrong.
> I'm dreaming about a "there should be only one" addressbook, the
> state of afairs is that every MUA implement their own addressbook,
> this is not good...
>
> and I repeat, evolution is in a strong position to define a de facto
> standard for addressbook format, but that format can't be a binary
> format because it broke interoperability and accesibility for
> others emails programs...
Its just a backand storage format, not an interoperability format.
_______________________________________________
evolution-hackers maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution-hackers
