Maxim Vuets wrote: > 2008/8/28, Matthias-Christian Ott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >> I don't propose to get rid of tags, no! I propose to introduce > >> workspaces in addition to tags. It will be just sets which keep > >> current layout and selected tags. That's all! > > > > +1 > > > > That makes sense to me, but where do you want to place the workspace > > list? > > It is not strongly neceserry. If status bar will be separate application, > it is not care of dwm. If not---I see one nice place: before tags list. > But not list and just a name of the current workspace.
If you want to seperate dwm and status bar you have to come up with a practical protocol. Assumed that dwm still manages the tags and status bar is just responsible for displaying the data, I propose (not perfect, just to give you an idea): :s n tag n was selected :d n tag n was deselected :a n tag n contains windows (litlle square) :l l layout l selected :t s set window title to s :f current window is floating Anyhow sourcing out the status bar that will probably make dwm more complex than the monolithic version. I really favour modularity, unix philsophy and simplicty, but I think in this case there are good enough reasons to break these rules, if you think in terms of LOC and complexity. > >> I want to use some layout scheme to one set of windows and > >> another layout to another set. dwm cannot do it. awesome can > >> (exactly for 2.x, don't know about 3.x). But it is broken---it tryies to > >> use > >> tags (yes, they are still tags) as workspaces. It remembers layout per > >> tag. > > > > +1 > > > > Another nice feature would be a workspace deck or tag deck. This way > > multiple tags or workspaces can be overlay each other on multiple > > layers. I don't if this really practically relevant. > > If I understand you correctly, I don't see practical usage of such deck. > Your example? I have to admit that ehe overlay makes just some sense with floating windows, otherwise it's just circling through workspaces/tags. Regards Matthias-Christian