Re: comments on current spec
- From: Paul Warren <pdw ferret lmh ox ac uk>
- To: John Harper <john dcs warwick ac uk>
- Cc: wm-spec-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: comments on current spec
- Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 00:27:17 +0100 (BST)
On Wed, 26 Apr 2000, John Harper wrote:
> I was stuck at home this morning, so I thought I'd take a first pass at
> implementing the current state of the spec, for sawmill (or whatever
> it's called these days)
Excellent because:
> I found a number of things that only became apparent to me once I'd
> started implementing it, so I thought I'd share them.
Yes, I figured this might happen...
> _NET_ACTIVE_WINDOW
>
> repeated sentence in description
Oops.
> doesn't specify what to set it to if _no_ window is focused
>
> should the client message also select the desktop/viewport the
> window is a member of?
Do you mean so that a pager can change the desktop of a window? This
would duplicate the _NET_WM_DESKTOP client message. The current version
no longer includes the "degrees of activation" which I think allowed
control of when windows should be activated on other desktops because
nobody on this list could offer a full explanation of it. If you want to
see what was in the spec, take a look at
http://ferret.lmh.ox.ac.uk/~pdw/wm-spec
> _NET_CLOSE_WINDOW / _NET_WM_MOVERESIZE
>
> why the inconsistent names?
>
> I suggest _NET_WM_CLOSE_WINDOW / _NET_WM_MOVE_RESIZE, or
> _NET_CLOSE_WINDOW, _NET_MOVE_RESIZE (see later)
OK. I wondered about removing the WM too, but just carried on the
tradition of previous drafts.
> also, why not have separate messages for move and resize, there
> seems to be nothing gained from combining them?
OK.
> also, if allowing resize grab position to be specified why not
> add the possibility to restrict the movement to a single
> dimension?
I think that this should be left to the WM eg. some WMs might restrict
movement of a SIZE_RIGHT resize to one dimensions, others might allow
vertical resizing if you drag outside the (extended) boundaries of the
window.
This should probably be clarified in the spec.
> _NET_{INSERT,DELETE}_DESKTOP, _NET_DESKTOP_VIEWPORT
>
> format of these client messages is never specified, I assumed:
[...]
> same for _NET_DESKTOP_GEOMETRY
[...]
Yep, sounds reasonable.
> _NET_PROPERTIES
>
> do we really need it, is there enough measurable benefit to
> warrant this thing?
I have no idea - quite possibly not.
> _NET_WM_DESKTOP
>
> the 0xfffffff thing means to me `put it on desktop 2^32-1', not
> `put it on all desktops'. Why not just add another STICKY-like
> state instead?
Yes. I would recommend _NET_[WM_]_STATE_STICKY_DESKTOP, and change the
existing STICKY to STICKY_VIEWPORT.
> _NET_WM_STATE client message
>
> allows two actions specifically to allow simultaneous
> vert/horiz maximization; why not just define a `pseudo state'
> _NET_WM_STATE_MAXIMIZED that signifies this?
This would indeed be more elegant.
> if anyone's interested, my implementation is at:
>
> http://www.dcs.warwick.ac.uk/~john/wm-spec.jl
>
> though it's only about 80% complete and totally untested,
It would be good if this, and any other implementations by members of this
list, could be linked to from the spec.
Paul
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]