Re: RFC: frame size hints
- From: Thomas Fitzsimmons <fitzsim redhat com>
- To: Lubos Lunak <l lunak suse cz>
- Cc: wm-spec-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: RFC: frame size hints
- Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 15:12:02 -0500
On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 07:03, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 of December 2003 01:10, Rob Adams wrote:
> > Definitely should be "calculate". Window managers implementing
> > approximations should document this is their respective COMPLIANCE
> > documents.
>
> I object. I hope the previous messages in the thread have shown that it can
> be a major pain to always get it right, if it's actually possible at all.
> KWin simply cannot calculate it, it can only estimate.
OK. I'm fine with describing the hint as an estimate. Having a
standard way to get a decent estimate is way better than having nothing
at all. And describing the hint as an estimate will probably mean that
more window manager authors will create best-effort implementations
rather than just ignoring the hint and declaring non-compliance. Rob,
are you OK with this?
> Even Havoc said in one
> message that the Metacity patch (which is the reference implementation for
> this) is not guaranteed to get it right.
Yes, but FWIW, I believe it is possible to fix the implementation so
that the extents are always correct; the Metacity patch is just an
initial implementation of an admittedly difficult-to-get-really-right
feature.
> And I said already, I'd actually
> prefer if the wording stressed more the fact that it can be just a guess.
OK, should I add an implementation note or something?
Tom
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]