Re: Proposing _NET_WM_STATE_FULLSCREEN_EXCLUSIVE

> You should definitely say "monitor" not "screen" as the latter is
> easily confused with "Screen", which as Bryce points out, often has
> several monitors.

Yeah, that was bothering me, and I wasn't sure what was correct. I'll 
update the language to fix this.

> On a broader issue, I think you are trying to tackle too narrow a
> problem.  The resolution changing problem is a special case of a more
> general situation - something wants to take the display hardware (or
> some subset of it) away from the Window Manager, perhaps also the X
> server, and existing clients, without altering their stored state.

That's a pretty heavyweight solution. It also assumes that drivers are 
happy to handle this case, and that GPUs are designed to do this 
efficiently. Neither are my area of expertise, but I suspect neither is 
true.

But it also stems from an incorrect assumption: I don't want to take 
away the display hardware from the Window Manager. In fact, I absolutely 
want the Window Manager involved in this. There are several decisions it 
needs to make and states it needs to manage, including taking the screen 
back if the user wants to alt-tab between applications.

> What is wrong with _NET_WM_FULLSCREEN_MONITORS?

That's a good question. Raster, can we repurpose this, or do you need more?

--ryan.