On Fri, 17 Feb 2006 10:23:17 +0100 Bradley T Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled:
> Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > > I've attached a test file with some suggested changes to the systray > > spec (as per the thread that was going on). comments sought. anyone? > > is there a general agreement this would be good? > > The details look good to me... I'm looking forward to getting to > implement support for it :) However, I have only one suggestion: > > > a systray icon conforming to the newer scheme will have either an > > property of the atom _NET_SYSTEM_TRAY_ICON_ID and type ATOM, and > > format 32 or a property of the atom _NET_SYSTEM_TRAY_ICON_NAME and > > type UTF8_STRING on the tray icon window. > > How about instead of saying "if either of these 2 properties, then > assume the client is using the new scheme", we could have a single, > authoritative way of saying "this client uses the new scheme". For > example, we could put _NET_WM_SYSTRAY_V2 in WM_PROTOCOLS, or perhaps set > _NET_WM_SYSTRAY_VERSION (for now, to 2 (type Cardinal format 32) on the > systray window. i wonder if this is worth it? ok - scenario. systray gets a message for a new window. now it looks for these 2 properties anyway one, then the other (whichever is has a preference for it will likely stop at and not fetch any further). if both fetches fail - well it can just drop back to the "old method" OR abort managing the systray icon entirely. this i would guess would be as good a check as to what to do without adding an extra version check then proceed to do the above code anyway? just wondering if we really need the version property - i'm not so much against it, but no need to add more than we REALLY need? -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 裸好多 Tokyo, Japan (東京 日本) _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
