Re: Still need a hint for undecorated windows

[Lubos Lunak <l lunak suse cz>]

On Monday 27 of June 2005 10:55, Tuomo Valkonen wrote:
> On 2005-06-26, Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2005-06-26 at 10:51 +0200, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> >>  I'm not sure what exactly you mean, but should these be toplevel
> >> windows at all? If it's really part of the window, it should really be a
> >> part of the window.
> >
> > The problem is that subwindows are clipped to the parent window. There's
> > various ways to imagine fixing X or the toolkits, but right now a
> > toplevel is pretty much the easiest approach...

 Ok, then I don't know what you mean. Any screenshot?

> How about a (_NET_)WM_TOOLBOX_FOR hint? If these windows are not
> short-lived and essentially modal, they're not transients and should not be
> marked as such.

 Hmm. It's been my understanding that WM_TRANSIENT_FOR is generally seen as 
"that's my parent window" and that's about it. The ICCCM description of it 
keeps up with the X's tradition of being as vague as possible.

> Separate toolbox windows are absolutely unusable UI design 
> (as if the conventional WIMP desktop wasn't already messy enough without a
> zillion toolboxes), but if you really need to have that kind of shit, why
> not have a nice semantic hint for it, so that the WM can place them along
> the sides of the window (perhaps in the same frame) or something?
>
> > The SELF_MANAGED name Rob suggested isn't bad probably...
>
> Such hints should not even exist, let alone be used.

-- 
Lubos Lunak
KDE developer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SuSE CR, s.r.o.  e-mail: l lunak suse cz , l lunak kde org
Drahobejlova 27  tel: +420 2 9654 2373
190 00 Praha 9   fax: +420 2 9654 2374
Czech Republic   http://www.suse.cz/