Re: WM-SPEC - what needs to happen for release ?

["Bradley T. Hughes" <bhughes trolltech com>]

On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, John Harper wrote:

> Bradley T. Hughes writes:
> |> lots of people vehemently did not want this added.
> |
> |Yes... I remember this.  As much as I hate to sound stubborn, regardless
> |of what this list says, the StaysOnTop hint is going to stay in my
> |implementation of the spec.  I run KDE and Blackbox both, and I don't see
> |the point in configuring applications *twice* for the same effect. :)
> 
> In that case you won't have an implementation of `the spec'. You'll
> have an implementation of another similar but incompatible spec
> 
> Since the weight of opinion seems to be against this hint, maybe you
> should add it as a separate property (i.e. not under the _NET_
> namespace)

This same argument could hold true for the _NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE
property.  If making an extension to the _NET_WM_STATE property is in
violation of the spec, then so is extending _NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE.  Which
means the using the list for extensibility is pointless, because specific
extensions are disallowed.

> 	John
> 
> 

--
Bradley T. Hughes <bhughes trolltech com>
Waldemar Thranes gt. 98B N-0175 Oslo, Norway
Office: +47 21 60 48 92
Mobile: +47 92 01 97 81