On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 11:45:48AM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote: > On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 11:09:29AM +0200, Stefan Tibus wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 11:06:08AM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote: > > > The question is if this is really necessary. Isn't having > > > unmanaged space on the right screen border sufficient? > > Because some people (including myself) may like it at the bottom, > > at the top, on the left, on both sides... > > > > Whatever - is it that much more difficult to handle x,y,w,h > > instead of just w? Don't you need to calculate those internally > > anyways? > > Sure, but keeping the options as minimal as possible is not a > bad thing in general. True. It is not a good idea to come up with a lot of options to make it as much configurable as possible. But hiding options just to not ask too much of the users is not a way to go as well. Here it's about options that are variants of each other and in principle already are within the code. It's a bit like supporting ascending but not descending sort order, if they were left out.
> We will see, it is quite a detail. It's a detail and maybe not the time to discuss on it too much, but it should be kept in mind. Regards, Stefan _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://wmii.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wmii
