Proposal and RFC: DAL, the Desktop Abstraction Layer

[Jamie McCracken]

Mike Hearn wrote:

> I think the confusion arises because a DBUS name activates a *service*
> not an *object*. 
> 

So perhaps the question I should have asked Havoc is "should Dbus 
activation return an object then?"

We already have multiple services (each of which can contain multiple 
objects and mutliple interfaces) for an app so would returning an object 
simplify things?

(I would envision it then as one object per service name. Only apps 
having multiple objects would then have multiple services.)

Is there a case where not returning an object is more advantageous?

jamie.