Re: Work in Progress: draft 1.9a
- From: Matthias Clasen <clasen pong mathematik uni-freiburg de>
- To: dominik vogt gmx de
- CC: wm-spec-list gnome org, "recipient.list.not.shown":;;;@redhat.com;
- Subject: Re: Work in Progress: draft 1.9a
- Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 11:42:35 +0200
> > A window manager honors _NET_WM_DESKTOP whenever a withdrawn window
> Or it may choose to never honour it (e.g. if the user asked it to
> do so).
> > requests to be mapped. When being in another state (iconified or
> > mapped), the client can request a change by sending a _NET_WM_DESKTOP
> Is that an intentional name collision? I don't think it's a good idea
> to have a client message and a property with the same name.
This is done all the time, isn't it. It saves on the number of atoms
apps have to negotiate with the server. And it is not a real name collision,
since atoms are interpreted wrt. to more than one namespace (up to 5, I
> Can this happen at all? Will applications that set _NET_ hints use
> MWM hints? We can simply define that setting MWM and _NET_ hints at
> the same time is illegal.
But apps may want to use MWM hints to work with older wms which don't
support _NET_ hints. I would prefer to have clearly-defined priorities,
eg _NET_ hints override MWM or OLWM hints.
Mathematisches Institut, Albert-Ludwigs-Universitaet Freiburg
] [Thread Prev