It would be nice if there was a clear way to find out *all* the visible
area. Right now it looks like I have to try a really large rectangle and
just hope I have managed to cover all of the current output. It seems to
me that getting rid of the rectangle and returning the result as though
it was infinite in size would be simpler and cover what I would imagine
a toolkit will actually do. Is there a reason for the rectangle?
Another idea is to allow it to return a clip that is *larger* than the
rectangle. This may be useful if the visible area is discontiguous: only
the areas that intersect the rectangle are returned, and if none do then
the "closest" one is returned. May be useful if a surface spans more
than one output.
This should replace all the proposed automatic-positioning of child
surfaces in the shell api. That was never going to work except for
trivial popup modal questions. Real overlays want to draw graphics in
both the overlay and main window pointing at each other, and popup in
positions that use complex rules (like a submenu on the opposite side of
a parent, or the parent menu shifted over so that a potential submenu
can appear) that cannot be conveyed from client to server without the
server becoming a program interpreter.
_______________________________________________
wayland-devel mailing list
wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
