Re: wms offsetting XMoveWindow() coords

On Mon, 27 Sep 1999, Michael ROGERS wrote:

> Alternatively, we could just specify one of these behaviours as "correct" in
> the spec, so only half the window managers will need to be modified.

It seems to me that from what the others are saying, ICCCM has already
deemed the first behavior as "correct" and the latter as incorrect.
Perhaps the spec should only serve as a reminder of this fashion, or
provide a workaround if it seems like it will not be adhered to.

> > Michael Rogers 

On 23 Sep 1999 23:56:30, Eliot Lee wrote:

> I hate to break it to you, but everyone I've talked to hates that web
> site. wm-spec-list already exists, is the perfect method for discussing
> the specification, and is convenient & open. The web site is awkward to
> use, still isn't totally open for all to access, and requires people to
> remember Yet Another Password in order to manipulate.

Ok, this is time for the group to open up and answer the question. Is this
the general impression that people have of the site? If so, it is no big
loss. A few hours worth of coding time is by far worth the attempt, even
if it is a complete and total loss.

In my opinion, the email list is great for discussion but to date has been
poor to deal with the most important issue at hand: developing the
specification. Email is great for conversion, but then to have to glean
through the email takes a long amount of time. Constantly revising a draft
spec with each email conversely is a waste of time, as every new email
will require a change. The idea of the site was to organize comments by
the item of discussion, allowing for an automatic trackability of
developer opinion.

However, if the site isn't going to do it, then fine, so be it. But my
second question is, who has been keeping track of the draft spec since
Marko had to hand it over, and who wants to arbitrate the next one? Is
that something you want me to do? If so, I will, but you'll have to
correct me when I'm wrong (though that is the usual mechanism of things).

My third question is, does anyone have a solid idea of how close we are to
being "done"? In my honest opinion, I do not believe that we can honestly
say we are even close when there is still confusion as to what we are
aiming towards supporting via this specification. We have never concretely
outlined what this spec covers and does not, and attempts to do so have
not resulted in comments by members of this list.

If we can answer these three questions and move on, I think we will all be
quite a bit happier and a lot closer to "completion" (as if there is ever
such a thing).


Nathan P. Clemons                       "Peace favor your code."                 ICQ: 2810688
IN CONSTRUCTION:              

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]