Re: comments on current spec

On Thu, 27 Apr 2000, Paul Warren wrote:

> On Thu, 27 Apr 2000, John Harper wrote:
> > Paul Warren writes:
> > |> 
> > |> 	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?
> > 
> > No. I didn't explain myself very well. The draft spec says that an
> > application should send this client message to ``activate another
> > window''. My point is that the meaning of ``activate'' isn't clear to
> > me.
> > 
> > I guess the removal of the ``degrees of activation'' thing has caused
> > this confusion
> Indeed.  Degrees of activation was intended to specify this - whether a
> window on another desktop/viewport should be focused when activated, by
> switching desktop/viewport.
> > Presumably the intention is just to focus the window, but this may also
> > require activating the desktop that the window is a member of (e.g.
> > since unmapped windows may not be focused, and desktops may be
> > implemented by selectively unmapping windows)
> > 
> > So I think the spec should either say that ``activating'' the window
> > may not have any effect if the window is not in the current desktop or
> > viewport, or that the current desktop or viewport may be changed to
> > allow the window to be activated.
> Yes - Unless someone would like to argue for the reinclusion of DofA then
> it should be at the WMs discretion what happens to off-desktop windows.
> On the other hand, if a pager asks to "activate" a window this should be
> because the user has explicitly asked to work with that window, in which
> case switching desktops to make it visible would seem like the correct
> behaviour.

the pager can here request the appropriate desktop changes itself (as
desk-guide currently does btw).
it might be rarely needed, but the current spec allowes for "activation"
of off-viewport windows, i.e. giving keyboard input to windows that are
on another viewport/desktop.
i think we should preserve this for two reasons
1) strange quirks like me might use it to e.g. C-c a running process
   in an off-viewport window ;)
2) the pager can implement configuration dependant policies like
   activate-switches-to-windows-viewport or

of course, 2) can also be implemented by window managers for other
pager/wm combinations than desk-guide/sawmill (sawmill doesn't come
with its own pager), so imho, we shouldn't hardwire behaviour in the

> Paul


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