I guess that we cannot guarantee that some windows are visible and other one are not. We can say something general like in the current fix, or we can provide an explanation of our internal implementation.
> 15 марта 2017 г., в 18:49, Philip Race <philip.r...@oracle.com> написал(а): > > Good that got cleared up but since bar slight change in the wording > we are back to v0 of the webrev, then we are also back to v0 of my > comments. What are you going to say to JCK about what windows > they can expect to be visible ? > Can we say > - Frames are always visible It is not necessary, if the frame has utility type. > - Dialogs are always visible if they have no owner This is implementation details on windows. I am not sure why it was implemented this way, is it really intended behavior or not. > - All other cases (eg Window) are platform dependent ? > Or can we say for the latter, other descendants of Window (including > Window itself) are never visible ?
