Re: Proposing _NET_WM_STATE_FULLSCREEN_EXCLUSIVE

On 10/25/2012 11:08 AM, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
>>> It's possible that the right answer is to basically implement the
>>> proposed protocol as an x extension instead of a wm extension.
>> My thought is that the Window Manager would want to handle some
>> specifics (to wit: it would want to manage some windows), but the
>> absolute heart of the problem is that some central authority needs to be
>> in charge of resolution changes, not every app, and an X extension could
>> solve that too.
> I hope we could agree that nobody wants to change the resolution, but that
> faking the "right" resolution for the game window should be enough. In the
> Wayland world that is the compositor (easy, controls both screen and input) in
> the X world it could be either the compositor (downside no "direct" input in
> compositor, unredirection does not work) or the X-Server. If it's in the X-
> Server it would just work with all systems and would be without changing all

I strongly disagree on that. Although I usually try to run my games at 
highest reasonable resolution, I know there are cases when you don't 
want to make this assumption. For instance:

* For graphics-intensive games (e.g. first person shooters), drawing 
rate (frames/sec) is very important - some gamers reduce the resolution 
from native to get higher rates.
* For gamers with vision problems, users with really high res monitors, 
or just games not designed to run at high res, it's really hard to see 
the proper detail and/or interact with the game

Faking the "right" resolution is also not a silver bullet, as some 
gamers may use TVs or monitors with built-in antialiasing and 
(reasonably) expect the low-res game to look nicer than on plain monitor 
-- this means you can't just upscale the game's resolution blindly.



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