Re: _NET: Disabling shading

[Dominik Vogt <dominik vogt gmx de>]

On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 11:32:52AM +0200, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> On Wednesday 01 of October 2003 09:45, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 05:29:46PM -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2003-09-30 at 10:22, Denis O. Mikhalkin wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > we want to open the discussion regarding support for shading in
> > > > > different WMs, in particular those implementing _NET protocol.
> > > > >
> > > > > Right now there is no means in _NET protocol to disable shading for
> > > > > a window. There is no state of the window in which the WM would
> > > > > consider shading for this window disabled. We propose to add a
> > > > > special state to support disabled shading.
> >
> > I think we need a _NET_WM_ANNOY_USER_IN_MOST_DISRUPTING_WAY
> > message too ;-)
> 
>  It's called urgency hint, and it's in the ICCCM :). Let's skip the fact that 
> the only WM I know that supports it is FVWM, and it supports it by doing 
> nothing by default IIRC (but I may be wrong here, it's a long time since I 
> checked this).

The fvwm defaults are:

  AddToFunc UrgencyFunc
   + I Iconify off
   + I FlipFocus
   + I Raise
   + I WarpToWindow 5p 5p
  AddToFunc UrgencyDoneFunc
   + I Nop

But if applications started to abuse this hint, we would probably
revert to Nop as the default.

> > > We may well need to have a richer language for expressing which windows
> > > are modal shadowed though; at the very least, the spec needs to be more
> > > clear about how to determine which windows are unresponsive while a
> > > window of type MODAL is active.
> >
> > Wouldn't the window group hint be a good candidate?
> 
>  Yes. I think we even have it in the spec already, in the description of 
> _NET_WM_STATE_MODAL :). I don't think there is need for more grained 
> specification of which windows it makes modal that what's currently in the 
> spec, as applications usually don't have more complex their internal state of 
> modality.

>  On the other hand, I wouldn't mind extending WM_TRANSIENT_FOR to be able to 
> point to more than one window, as I actually recently encountered a problem 
> related to this WM_TRANSIENT_FOR limitation. I'll try to write a patch for 
> the spec and post it.

I'd rather do without that "feature".  Handling trees of
transients is already almost impossible to handle gracefully
without multiple paths in the window relationships :-P

> > > If it isn't clear "modal-shadowed" means "windows that you can't
> > > interact with while the modal window is alive"

Ciao

Dominik ^_^  ^_^