On Saturday 13 of October 2007, Tuomo Valkonen wrote: > On 2007-10-13, Lubos Lunak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Besides, I still don't see how all this should solve the TYPE_NORMAL > > problem I mentioned in my previous mail, which I actually consider to be > > more important part of it. > > I guess you didn't read what I wrote.
I did, but maybe I didn't get it. Are you talking maybe about "crappy toolkits or such forcing a window type being specified"? AFAIK it's a rather common practice to detect client support for the spec by a presence of any _NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE hint. Not to mention that, quoting, "The Client SHOULD specify window types in order of preference (the first being most preferable) but MUST include at least one of the basic window type atoms from the list below." > But, oh, well, go ahead and > design your highly specific ultra-complex kludgy WIMPshit crap like > you've always done. After all, world domination by Gnome and KDE > shit is more important than keeping things nice, clean and abstract, > and fostering alternatives. I love you too. -- Lubos Lunak KDE developer -------------------------------------------------------------- SUSE LINUX, s.r.o. e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] , [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lihovarska 1060/12 tel: +420 284 028 972 190 00 Prague 9 fax: +420 284 028 951 Czech Republic http//www.suse.cz _______________________________________________ wm-spec-list mailing list wm-spec-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/wm-spec-list