[Meego-architecture] Maliit and MeeGo Core Compliance

[John Veness]

On 12/07/2011 16:27, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On 7/12/2011 6:58 AM, Michael Hasselmann wrote:
>> [M] http://maliit.org
>> [ARCH] http://maliit.org/doc/framework/architecture.html
>>
>> * We would also want to require that the Maliit framework is the input
>> method solution that's actually used, not just shipped.
>
> that's what compliance means... just having the bits on spinning rust /
> electrons in a well does not suffice; you can't put something "next" to
> a core component and only use yours.

Is that right? Both the 1.1 and the draft 1.1.80.1 specs at 
http://wiki.meego.com/Quality/Compliance say, in section 2.1:

"It is permissible for a system implementation to provide alternative 
implementations of system components, provided that the components 
required by the profile are present and fully functional. For example, 
an alternative media framework can be provided, as long as the MeeGo 
media framework is also present and fully functional (so that 
applications depending on the MeeGo media framework continue to work 
correctly)."

Cheers,

John