On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 11:14:51 -0400 Drew DeVault <s...@cmpwn.com> wrote:
> On 2018-04-16 2:57 PM, Jonas Ådahl wrote: > > I'd still like a bit more clarification about what to expect of this > > string. What I'm trying to avoid is one compositor sending "eDP-1" while > > another sends "Built-in Display". For example, the first is suitable for > > command line interfaces (e.g. movie-player --fullscreen-on HDMI-2), but > > the second is suitable for GUI's (e.g. a widget for selecting what > > monitor to play a movie on). If it can be either one, I don't see its > > usefulness in a generic client. > > I'm explicitly not trying to avoid that. To me it's acceptable that one > compositor uses "eDP-1" and another uses "Built-in Display". Hi, FWIW, I would personally be ok with the vague definition. First, I don't think that apps that use command line or other textual interface to specify an output are a thing. We're aiming for a graphical user interface, after all. Second, even if they are, the app can still offer shorthands for the possibly complicated "names", e.g. by using the wl_output global's name (uint). A CLI would need an option to list the possible outputs for a user to pick in the first place. The only thing I could criticise there is, is it really "name" or more like "description"? One still requires them to be unique anyway. I think calling it "description" would make people expect less of a standardized or single-alphanumeric-word spelling. But I won't insist on it. Thanks, pq
pgp20btu6opBb.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
