There's two different things here. There's the protocol and the UI. (By
UI I also mean a command-line tool like /usr/bin/xrandr, I just mean the
way the user does a mode-set).
I think to build a good UI, we need a list of available modes that the user
can choose from. Having a tool where the user enters two numbers, and then
tells the user No, guess again if they entered the wrong numbers is bad
user interface design.
But, as Hardening said, the protocol should allow setting modes that aren't
in the advertised list.
On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 10:34 PM, Wang, Quanxian quanxian.w...@intel.comwrote:
5) mode setting parameters control
Mode and output will be under the control. User could not randomly to
set their
mode. They have to select the available modes and outputs provided by
compositor. Don't allow random mode setting. The mode and output
information
could be provided by weston-randr apps or wl_output interface.
I don't think that allowing to set only announced modes is a good idea.
The RDP compositor is a good example where you can't know the supported
modes (as nearly all modes can be supported).
IIRC depending on the drivers, drm can also set arbitrary modes.
[Wang, Quanxian] so, let user set the mode without limitation? Not sure if
we should support that.
Any comment for this requirement?
Regards
--
David FORT
website: http://www.hardening-consulting.com/
___
wayland-devel mailing list
wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
--
Jasper
___
wayland-devel mailing list
wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
