Re: Quick question about spec

[Bradley Tyson Hughes <bhughes tcac net>]

On Thu, 17 Feb 2000, Matthias Ettrich wrote:
> > 
> > Window Movement
> > 
> > According to the ICCCM, applications should not see unnecessary differences
> > between running with or without a window manager. Therefore window movements
> > for already mapped windows, such as ones requested by
> > XMoveWindow(Display, Window, X, Y) have to move the window Window to the
> > coordinates (X, Y) and not cause the window's window manager frame window
> > to end up at (X, Y).
> > 
> 
> This is an interesting topic, I'm still not sure what is right here. Currently
> twm and kwm do it one way, mwm, fvwm probably E do it the other. That's bad.
> 
> What I don't like about moving windows to the actual coordinates (i.e.
> excluding the window manager frame) is the fact that it introduces a big
> difference between non-mapped windows and mapped windows.  
> 
> Or what's the semantics of   xclock -geometry +0+0? I don't think anybody
> expects the xlock showing up at (0,0) with its decoration frame being outside
> the visible area of the screen.
>
> Any good arguments for one or the other solution? Is ICCCM really that clear
> on the topic? (twm still behaves differently).
> 
> Whatever we do, I agree we might add it to the specs to clearify ICCCM in that
> respect.

as far as i understand, the ICCCM says that a window sending an
X_ConfigureWindow request to the X server (i.e.  XMoveWindow) should have the
upper left hand corner of the client window placed in that position, just like
it would if no window manager is running... this is if a window has been mapped
and managed by the window manager

for withdrawn/unmapped windows that request to be shown for the first time,
they should already be at the desired position,  set the window gravity
appropriately, and set XSizeHints.flags=USPosition (or PPosition)...

then the window manager should translate the current window coordinates based
on the window gravity that the client requests...  the ICCCM also encourages or
recommends (i can't remember which) that NorthWestGravity be the default if no
gravity is specified

i'm not saying that this is the way it is, or carved in stone... it is just my
interpretation of the ICCCM...  i also agree that this point should be
clarified in the new specification
 
> Matthias
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> To unsubscribe: mail wm-spec-list-request@gnome.org with "unsubscribe"
> as the Subject.
-- 
--- signature   Wed Dec 29 17:52:53 1999
+++ .signature  Wed Dec 29 17:53:19 1999
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+Bradley T Hughes <bhughes@tcac.net>
+-----------------------------------
+     http://blackbox.alug.org/