Re: WM features 2

hi all,
Thanks for your responses, I would like to go deeper in the subject if you
don't mind. I read in WM spec 1.3 about modality (
http://standards.freedesktop.org/wm-spec/wm-spec-1.3.html#id2494205), it is
told that "window managers offer support for handling modality". Which WM
can do this? Maybe FVWM... because there is a "ModalityIsEvil" option that
allows Motif based application to have modal dialogs! What about icewm?
I also want to know which WMs are Motif compliant, i mean WMs that support
Motif proprietaries protocols. Any idea?
How will Enlightenment behave with a Motif based application using modal
dialogs ?

Thanks

On Jan 25, 2008 5:00 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:

> Send wm-spec-list mailing list submissions to
>        [email protected]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/wm-spec-list
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        [email protected]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        [email protected]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of wm-spec-list digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: struts, workareas and xinerama (Lubos Lunak)
>   2. Re: struts, workareas and xinerama (Lubos Lunak)
>   3. Re: WM features (Lubos Lunak)
>   4. Re: WM features (Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman))
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:12:41 +0100
> From: Lubos Lunak <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: struts, workareas and xinerama
> To: [email protected]
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Monday 21 of January 2008, Dana Jansens wrote:
> > On Jun 13, 2007 8:52 AM, Havoc Pennington <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Dana Jansens wrote:
> > > > This has the property of being backwards compatible with previous
> > > > versions of the specification.  An application can read only the
> first
> > > > n (number of desktops) dimensions and ignore the remainder, and it
> > > > will not end up putting icons in nowhereland.
> > >
> > > It's probably not backward compatible; I know I've often written code
> > > that verifies the exact property length on various properties.
>
>  I wonder where people initially did not think of backwards compatibility
> or
> whether they expected nobody would do this. This is rather annoying :-/.
>
> > So, no one around here seems to have any objections to this idea re:
> > the WORKAREA property.  And I've seen more than one window manager
> > author complain about the lack of support for non-trivial xinerama
> > setups.  I would suggest that _NET_WORKAREA be deprecated in favour of
> > a new property, _NET_WORKAREA_MONITORS.  The same functionality of
> > using _NET_WORKAREA can be acheived from _NET_WORKAREA_MONITORS.
> >
> > The format, as previously stated would be:
> > _NET_WORKAREA_MONITORS, x, y, width, height CARDINAL[][][4]/32
> >
> > Which is an array of (x, y, width, height) tuples.
> >
> > A window manager MAY combine two or more monitors together into a
> > single (x, y, width, height) in the property, if it deems this
> > appropriate (basically, only the trivial xinerama case, without any
> > partial struts along the long edge, all monitors using the same sized
> > desktop).
>
>  Especially given this, I suggest _NET_WORKAREA_AREAS as the name. Well,
> not
> that nice name either, but I'm bad at names.
>
> > I would like to write a proposal for this if there are still no
> > objections.  However even simple submissions with no objections in the
> > past seem to get ignored on this list.  Who are those currently
> > responsible for making commits to the wm-spec document?
>
>  I don't think there's anybody "responsible".  The spec is a collective
> work.
> If you want something added to it, post a proposal here, incorporate
> feedback, repeat until there's no feedback, ask for inclusion. I can do
> the
> commit then if you have no account.
>
> --
> Lubos Lunak
> KDE developer
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> SUSE LINUX, s.r.o.   e-mail: [email protected] , [email protected]
> Lihovarska 1060/12   tel: +420 284 028 972
> 190 00 Prague 9      fax: +420 284 028 951
> Czech Republic       http//www.suse.cz
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:19:10 +0100
> From: Lubos Lunak <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: struts, workareas and xinerama
> To: [email protected]
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Wednesday 13 of June 2007, Dana Jansens wrote:
> > Secondly, I am in need of some clarification in terms of struts with
> > Xinerama. In the above example, say an application set a strut on the
> > "right side" with a length of the 1st monitor.  Where exactly does
> > this strut reside? It could reside entirely on the first monitor, it
> > could reside on the second monitor (and the nowhereland above it) or
> > it could be split between the two monitors.
> >
> > I expect there is no answer to this question, which is frustrating
> > because this is a real-life setup that one of my users has talked
> > about recently.  Perhaps _NET_WM_STRUT_PARTIAL is just not enough, and
> > needs to be able to specify the monitor as well as start/length.
>
>  Correct. The strut hints talk about desktop (root window) edges, so they
> don't support reserved areas "inside". That basically matches
> _NET_WORKAREA,
> so if you want to extend one, you probably want to do the same with the
> other
> one.
>
> --
> Lubos Lunak
> KDE developer
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> SUSE LINUX, s.r.o.   e-mail: [email protected] , [email protected]
> Lihovarska 1060/12   tel: +420 284 028 972
> 190 00 Prague 9      fax: +420 284 028 951
> Czech Republic       http//www.suse.cz
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:26:13 +0100
> From: Lubos Lunak <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: WM features
> To: [email protected]
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="utf-8"
>
> On Monday 21 of January 2008, kettani lalla fatima zahra wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > i have a question about window manager's features. Is there any WM that
> can
> > force an application specific window to behave as a system modal window?
> >  *I know for example that mwm offers XmNmwmInputMode* resource that can
> be
> > used by an application to set a system modal window, but i am interested
> by
> > a customisation that could be done through WM without being invoked by
> the
> > application it self.
>
>  If by system modal you mean a window that will block all remaining
> windows,
> then that is generally, with very few exceptions, considered to be evil
> and I
> doubt you'll get support for something like that. Especially given that
> the
> few expections work like described in another answer, with override
> redirect
> and grab.
>
> > And for screensavers, is there a WM that can allow a program to pop up
> over
> > a screen saver?
>
>  No. It is up to the screensaver what it allows, or rather not allows, to
> be
> visible.
>
> --
> Lubos Lunak
> KDE developer
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> SUSE LINUX, s.r.o.   e-mail: [email protected] , [email protected]
> Lihovarska 1060/12   tel: +420 284 028 972
> 190 00 Prague 9      fax: +420 284 028 951
> Czech Republic       http//www.suse.cz
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 11:19:00 +1100
> From: Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: WM features
> To: Lubos Lunak <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:26:13 +0100 Lubos Lunak <[email protected]> babbled:
>
> > On Monday 21 of January 2008, kettani lalla fatima zahra wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > i have a question about window manager's features. Is there any WM
> that can
> > > force an application specific window to behave as a system modal
> window?
> > >  *I know for example that mwm offers XmNmwmInputMode* resource that
> can be
> > > used by an application to set a system modal window, but i am
> interested by
> > > a customisation that could be done through WM without being invoked by
> the
> > > application it self.
> >
> >  If by system modal you mean a window that will block all remaining
> windows,
> > then that is generally, with very few exceptions, considered to be evil
> and I
> > doubt you'll get support for something like that. Especially given that
> the
> > few expections work like described in another answer, with override
> redirect
> > and grab.
>
> agreed. irrespective of whatever a spec might say in mwm or netwm - i know
> i
> would never support such a feature in enlightenment. it simply removes
> control
> from a user. dialogs that hold your whole screen hostage are just evil. if
> you
> must do it - then it will be your extra level of work to grab keyboard,
> mouse,
> and so on - hopefully giving you a dis-incentive to try do this as it
> raises
> the barrier of entry for the app programmer.
>
> > > And for screensavers, is there a WM that can allow a program to pop up
> over
> > > a screen saver?
> >
> >  No. It is up to the screensaver what it allows, or rather not allows,
> to be
> > visible.
> >
> > --
> > Lubos Lunak
> > KDE developer
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > SUSE LINUX, s.r.o.   e-mail: [email protected] , [email protected]
> > Lihovarska 1060/12   tel: +420 284 028 972
> > 190 00 Prague 9      fax: +420 284 028 951
> > Czech Republic       http//www.suse.cz
> > _______________________________________________
> > wm-spec-list mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/wm-spec-list
> >
>
>
> --
> ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------
> The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler)    [email protected]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> wm-spec-list mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/wm-spec-list
>
>
> End of wm-spec-list Digest, Vol 40, Issue 5
> *******************************************
>

_______________________________________________
wm-spec-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/wm-spec-list