add a couple of notes about libdbus vs. bindings

diff --git a/README b/README
index 4e39c264e8f05d812163e6ab6945cf948aad06ba..a26dbb29e58222190cd14e73f516d70381d21f07 100644 (file)
--- a/README
+++ b/README
@@ -5,6 +5,14 @@ See also the file HACKING for notes of interest to developers working on D-BUS.
 See http://www.freedesktop.org/software/dbus/ for lots of documentation, 
 mailing lists, etc.
 
+Note
+===
+
+A core concept of the D-BUS implementation is that "libdbus" is
+intended to be a low-level API, similar to Xlib. Most programmers are
+intended to use the bindings to GLib, Qt, Python, Mono, Java, or
+whatever. These bindings have varying levels of completeness.
+
 Configuration flags
 ===
 

diff --git a/doc/dbus-tutorial.xml b/doc/dbus-tutorial.xml
index 6f25289ec54bf64151fe3fe86e13ef94ec197985..2bb67a4e50dd3f3324dce179ba2459d4131823ca 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/dbus-tutorial.xml
+++ b/doc/dbus-tutorial.xml
@@ -50,7 +50,9 @@
             application frameworks.  For example, libdbus-glib and
             libdbus-qt. There are also bindings to languages such as
             Python. These wrapper libraries are the API most people should use,
-            as they simplify the details of D-BUS programming.
+            as they simplify the details of D-BUS programming. libdbus is 
+            intended to be a low-level backend for the higher level bindings.
+            Much of the libdbus API is only useful for binding implementation.
           </para>
         </listitem>
       </itemizedlist>