On 2/13/08, Mark Tiefenbruck <mark fluxbox org> wrote:
> Here's one more suggestion for a format. There seems to be some
>  difficulty about what the bounds for the window should actually be.
>  Should the window fully contain all monitors listed or be fully
>  contained by all monitors listed? Or something different? I don't
>  think any of the suggestions have really addressed this. Perhaps the
>  most versatile approach (without giving complete control to the
>  application) is to specify four monitors, one for each edge. Then, for
>  example, the top edge of the window would be aligned with the top edge
>  of the corresponding monitor, and the same logic would apply to the
>  other three edges.

I think that this models what is actually trying to be requested
better than the previous four suggestions.  I think it may be worth
defining what would be expected when a specified monitor disappears or
resizes though.  This option also requires some more complcated code
in any app that lets you change this hint, as it needs to pick
different monitors based on how they fit together, but with the
advantage of letting apps really specify what they mean.

The monitor indices approach is problematic as there are many monitor
configuration requests whose correct behaviours are completely
undefined, such as choosing 1 and 2 from below:
| 1 | 3 | 2 |

The upper limit on the number of monitors is also troubling.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]