Re: Applications and layers

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 01:10:26PM -0500, Billy Biggs wrote:
> Havoc Pennington (hp redhat com):
> 
> > On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 11:32:27AM -0500, Billy Biggs wrote: 
> > >   Lubos Lunak and I had a discussion about this on IRC and it sort of
> > > clarified a bit for me at least what DESKTOP and DOCK should mean, in
> > > that, I should only use them if I am a desktop or a dock.  Right?
> > 
> > Yes. Though, I think more things are probably DOCK than are currently
> > marked as DOCK; e.g. I'd tend to mark gkrellm as DOCK. But no, a TV
> > viewer is most likely not DOCK.
> 
>   Why would you mark gkrellm as DOCK and not ABOVE, isn't this exactly
> what ABOVE is for?  Also, how do you mark gkrellm as DOCK?

gkrellm is weird in all kinds of ways other than wanting to be on top,
e.g. it has no window decorations and moves itself rather than being
moved by the WM and so forth.

to mark as DOCK you do as it says in the spec (_NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE or
whatever hint)
 
>   Your intent seems fair, but I worry that the spec is being too open
> about how these attributes are at least intended to be used.  I think
> more guidance can be given at least about what my responsibilities are
> as an application.  For example, "am I responsible for providing the
> always-on-top feature if users request it for my application?"

Well, I would be open to documenting that stuff, but I think there
probably isn't enough consensus among WM and application authors.

Havoc