On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 03:50:33PM -0700, Bryce Harrington wrote: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 12:26:28AM +0200, Jan Arne Petersen wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 1:01 PM Carlos Garnacho <carl...@gnome.org> wrote: > > > > Hi Carlos, > > > > Thanks for the feedback. > > > > > > > > Chiming in, and kinda late at that... hopefully we'll get this moving :). > > > > I do not think we want to change text_input_unstable_v2 version 1 anymore > > (since it already got shipped in Qt 5.7.0 and Plasma 5.7.0). Sorry for that. > > But I already started to work on text_input_unstable_v2 version 2 and also > > text_input_unstable_v3 where I like to include the feedback. > > > > > First of all, I'm aware that some of my comments are directed towards > > > stuff that's unchanged between v1 and v2, so please bear with me, I > > > hope the feedback is useful. > > > > Sure that is perfectly fine, I think that is the idea of the unstable > > protocols > > anyways that we can still change everything and adapt them with real > > world experience. > > > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 11:41 AM, Jan Arne Petersen <jana...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > There were some shortcomings in the first version of the protocol which > > > > makes it not really useful in real world applications. It is not really > > > > possible to fix them in a compatible way so introduce a new v2 of the > > > > protocol. > > > > > > > > Fixes some shortcomings of the first version: > > > > > > > > * Use only one wp_text_input per wl_seat (client side should be > > > > handled by client toolkit) > > > > * Allow focus tracking without wl_keyboard present > > > > * Improve update state handling and better define state handling > > I'd love to see a re-rev of this patch. Looking at a diff between v1 > and v2, those three changes seem quite suitable, although I'd like to > see an exact minimal diff of the changes so holding off on detailed > review. But worth an acked by at least:
I share this sentiment! > > Acked-by: Bryce Harrington <br...@osg.samsung.com> > > The input-method and text-input protocols both deal with similar > functionality (text input). I'm not sure if we already have a high > level description somewhere that describes their relationship, but at a > minimum I think the protocols ought to cross-reference each other. (For > instance, something like, "See also the input-method protocol, which > provides ...") When I first looked at the two protocols, just reading > their descriptions it wasn't obvious at all how they related; it only > clicked after studying the weston code. I spent quite a long time looking at those protocols and their client/compositor implementations (in Weston as well as in QTWayland). By now I think I have at least a basic understanding of how they should work together. I was wondering where a high-level documentation describing how text input is handled (with the help of an input method) should live. Since those are unstable protocols, maybe adding an .md file somewhere in wayland-protocols/unstable/ would be appropriate? I have one question regarding the following request (I hope this is the right place to ask): > <request name="set_cursor_rectangle"> > <description summary="set cursor position"> > Sets the cursor outline as a x, y, width, height rectangle in surface > local coordinates. > > Allows the compositor to put a window with word suggestions near the > cursor. > </description> > <arg name="x" type="int"/> > <arg name="y" type="int"/> > <arg name="width" type="int"/> > <arg name="height" type="int"/> > </request> I assume that the "window with word suggestions" that this request enables the compositor to draw will be supplied by the input method (though the current version of the input-method protocol does not seem to provide an event/request for this yet). Is this assumption correct? Cheers, Silvan _______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel