Hi, On 28/11/06, Magnus Bergman <<a href="mailto:magnus.bergman@observer.net">magnus.bergman@observer.net</a>> wrote: <blockquote style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;" class="gmail_quote">Is it only realistic that users would want (or should be able) to do such simple searches? I think it's realistic to imagine that there can be different search engines which are good at different things. Perhaps one is good at finding media files by their tags. One that is good at finding relevant information from fuzzy terms.</blockquote> The multiple search engine problem seems to be the perfect use case for dbus naming. Each search engine registers a well known unique name e.g. "org.novel.Beagle.simple"  and tries to own "org.freedesktop.search.simple". Thus if I want to be picky about who to query I ask for the engine specific name, and if I don't care (surely the common case) I ask for the well known name. Wrapping a library around this would be fine, but the main point of the spec needs to be defining this interface ("search.simple") and getting everyone to implement it. On 28/11/06, Magnus Bergman <<a href="mailto:magnus.bergman@observer.net">magnus.bergman@observer.net</a>> wrote: <div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">At least I see it there has to be some kind of daemon if there is a dbus interface. </blockquote></div> Use dbus activation.