Re: Autoplacement hint

[Mike McCormack <mike codeweavers com>]

Ben Jansens wrote:

> Can't you assume that the window manager actually supports the ICCCM in the
> first place? What happens if a window manager claims to honor this new hint
> and then figures it knows better in some situations anyhow? A window manager
> that can't obey standards puts you in the same position in both cases.
>
> It sounds like you're simply looking for a way to determine if a window
> manager "works" (many don't very well), and just work around it with
> unmanaged windows if it does not. Is there any reason you can't depend on
> the WM following existing standards and just state that you don't support
> using your softawre on broken ones?
>
> Having to work around broken WMs is kinda counter-productive and unnessesary
> in my opinion. I'd like to think toolkits shouldn't have to do these sorts of
> things.
>
> Ben

Well, I guess the issue is that the ICCCM is not really clear on whether 
you can change the PPosition that the program specified. To quote the ICCCM:

"To indicate that it was specified by the client without any user 
involvement, the client should set PPosition and PSize ."

That doesn't rule out the window manager changing the PPosition and 
PSize that I set.  Perhaps we should add a clarification to the EWMH 
specification along the longs of:

If a program sets a valid PPosition and PSize, the window manager SHOULD 
NOT change them in any way.

I'd really like to have a toolkit that doesn't have to work around 
broken window managers, libraries and applications, but then the users 
of my toolkit will consider it to be broken.  My guess is that many 
window manager authors will argue that autoplacement when PPosition is 
set is not in violation of the ICCCM.  So what should I do?

Mike