On Monday 27 of June 2005 10:55, Tuomo Valkonen wrote: > On 2005-06-26, Havoc Pennington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] , [EMAIL PROTECTED] Drahobejlova 27 tel: +420 2 9654 2373 190 00 Praha 9 fax: +420 2 9654 2374 Czech Republic http://www.suse.cz/ _______________________________________________ wm-spec-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/wm-spec-list
