Lubos Lunak wrote: > > Hello, > > I'd like to standardize few more things about compositing managers. > Looking > at the spec, there are already few things in an added section, but it > almost looks like quickly hacked in and expecting that a WM and a CM have > to be the same (e.g. there should not be any _WM_ in the selection name). > So I thought the first thing to do should be to ask a couple of questions: > > - Are people fine with having it in one spec or should it be a separate > one building on top of EWMH? Some things are shared (e.g. > _NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE), but some are clearly separate. > I think that we should try to build it a separate spec on top of EWMH, because there still may be composite managers without a window manager functionality. Having it in one spec can lead to a point where things get mixed up, and it's not clear who (WM or CM), should be in charge for a specific window property.
Composite managers will always want to have a finer differentiation of the window type, than the current _NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE types provide. I think that something like _NET_CM_WINDOW_SUBTYPE could fullfill such task. If we find a type description that makes also sense from the window manager point of view, then we can define it as _NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE window type. Dennis _______________________________________________ wm-spec-list mailing list wm-spec-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/wm-spec-list
