Re: Decorations (again)

[Paul Warren <pdw ferret lmh ox ac uk>]

On Tue, 9 Nov 1999, Michael ROGERS wrote:

> [layers discussion snipped]
> 
> OK, if we have window categories which indicate both the functional category 
> and the visual category of the window (ie your suggestion of adding Desktop 
> and Dock categories), and there is already a hint to distinguish urgent 
> message boxes from non-urgent dialogs, do we need any layer hints at all?

The ability to set normal windows as "ontop" (and possibly "below") I
think is essential.  Perhaps this could go into the second group. 

> Does anyone think we need more flexibility than the following hints will 
> provide (except for unique cases which might be better handled on an
> individual basis)?

I think that pinnable menus are as widespread as toolbars, and as I
indicated, I think there is a case for distinguishing them to allow for
functional and visual differences from other windows.

What about windows that want no decoration at all, but still wish to be
managed?  Perhaps that should be a hint?  Or do we invent some more
categories?

And one final point: the current draft has 

#define _NET_WM_HINTS_STANDALONE_MENUBAR  (1<<4)         /* this window is
a standalone menubar */

Where does that fit into all this?  (I'd say it doesn't :-)

Apart from that it looks pretty good.

> Categories (set zero or one):
> 
> Desktop feature
> Dock
> Main window (default)
> Dialog
> Toolbar
> 
> Hints (set zero or more):
> 
> Modal
> Group modal
> Urgent

The ICCCM hint, or another one?

> Omnipresent

Currently this is handled by setting the desktop to 0xFFFFFFF.

> >I suggest that the way to stop an app being resized by the user is using
> >the WM_SIZE_HINT, setting both min and max sizes to the desired size. We
> >could state that a wm is free to interpret minsize == maxsize as meaning
> >no-resize decorations.  An explicit no-resize functional hint would seem
> >to duplicate this information, although conceivably might make programming
> >at both ends easier.  What do you reckon?
> 
> Sounds very neat.  :)

Which one - With the explicit hint or without it?

Paul