Re: Work in Progress: draft 1.9a

[Tim Janik <timj gtk org>]

On Mon, 5 Jul 1999, Paul Warren wrote:

> On Mon, 5 Jul 1999, Tim Janik wrote:
> > 
> > i.e. the "work area" refered to above is a desktop "page" in fvwm terminology.
> 
> I may have missed the point, but I thought WORK_AREA is meant to refer
> to the current page minus space occupied by panels, docks etc.  The
> purpose is to ensure that maximised applications do not cover panels, and
> so that desktop icons don't get put under panels.  Icewm has an
> implementation of this for maximising windows.

ugh, you are absolutely right. i actually confused that with the old
"_WIN_AREA" property which is what we have _NET_DESKTOP_VIEWPORT for
now.
i don't get though, why

> _NET_DESKTOP_VIEWPORT x,y, CARDINAL[2]/32
> 
> Array of two Cardinals that defines the toplevel corner of the current
> view. For window managers that don't support paged desktops, this is
> always (0,0). If a client wants to change the desktop viewport, it can
> send a _NET_DESKTOP_VIEWPORT client message to the root window (type
> _NET_DESKTOP_VIEWPORT, format 32, l[0]=<new x>, l[1]=<new y> ).

is just one (x,y) pair for the current desktop when 

> _NET_WORKAREA CARDINAL[][4]/32

is actually an array of ((x1,y2),(x2,y2)) pairs for all the desktops.
yesterday i wrote:

> i do think however, that we should make _NET_WORKAREA an array of
> left,right,top,bottom coordinates, since smoe window managers have
> a concept of independant work areas per desktop.
> also, pagers need information on what the current area of currently
> hidden desktops is, to display thumbnails of those desktops correctly.

and that holds even more true for _NET_DESKTOP_VIEWPORT (which is actually
what i *intended* to refer to).

> 
> yours,
> 
> Paul
> 

---
ciaoTJ