hi all, Thanks for your responses, I would like to go deeper in the subject if you don't mind. I read in WM spec 1.3 about modality ( http://standards.freedesktop.org/wm-spec/wm-spec-1.3.html#id2494205), it is told that "window managers offer support for handling modality". Which WM can do this? Maybe FVWM... because there is a "ModalityIsEvil" option that allows Motif based application to have modal dialogs! What about icewm? I also want to know which WMs are Motif compliant, i mean WMs that support Motif proprietaries protocols. Any idea? How will Enlightenment behave with a Motif based application using modal dialogs ?
Thanks On Jan 25, 2008 5:00 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Send wm-spec-list mailing list submissions to > wm-spec-list@gnome.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/wm-spec-list > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of wm-spec-list digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: struts, workareas and xinerama (Lubos Lunak) > 2. Re: struts, workareas and xinerama (Lubos Lunak) > 3. Re: WM features (Lubos Lunak) > 4. Re: WM features (Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman)) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:12:41 +0100 > From: Lubos Lunak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: struts, workareas and xinerama > To: wm-spec-list@gnome.org > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On Monday 21 of January 2008, Dana Jansens wrote: > > On Jun 13, 2007 8:52 AM, Havoc Pennington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Dana Jansens wrote: > > > > This has the property of being backwards compatible with previous > > > > versions of the specification. An application can read only the > first > > > > n (number of desktops) dimensions and ignore the remainder, and it > > > > will not end up putting icons in nowhereland. > > > > > > It's probably not backward compatible; I know I've often written code > > > that verifies the exact property length on various properties. > > I wonder where people initially did not think of backwards compatibility > or > whether they expected nobody would do this. This is rather annoying :-/. > > > So, no one around here seems to have any objections to this idea re: > > the WORKAREA property. And I've seen more than one window manager > > author complain about the lack of support for non-trivial xinerama > > setups. I would suggest that _NET_WORKAREA be deprecated in favour of > > a new property, _NET_WORKAREA_MONITORS. The same functionality of > > using _NET_WORKAREA can be acheived from _NET_WORKAREA_MONITORS. > > > > The format, as previously stated would be: > > _NET_WORKAREA_MONITORS, x, y, width, height CARDINAL[][][4]/32 > > > > Which is an array of (x, y, width, height) tuples. > > > > A window manager MAY combine two or more monitors together into a > > single (x, y, width, height) in the property, if it deems this > > appropriate (basically, only the trivial xinerama case, without any > > partial struts along the long edge, all monitors using the same sized > > desktop). > > Especially given this, I suggest _NET_WORKAREA_AREAS as the name. Well, > not > that nice name either, but I'm bad at names. > > > I would like to write a proposal for this if there are still no > > objections. However even simple submissions with no objections in the > > past seem to get ignored on this list. Who are those currently > > responsible for making commits to the wm-spec document? > > I don't think there's anybody "responsible". The spec is a collective > work. > If you want something added to it, post a proposal here, incorporate > feedback, repeat until there's no feedback, ask for inclusion. I can do > the > commit then if you have no account. > > -- > 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 > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:19:10 +0100 > From: Lubos Lunak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: struts, workareas and xinerama > To: wm-spec-list@gnome.org > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On Wednesday 13 of June 2007, Dana Jansens wrote: > > Secondly, I am in need of some clarification in terms of struts with > > Xinerama. In the above example, say an application set a strut on the > > "right side" with a length of the 1st monitor. Where exactly does > > this strut reside? It could reside entirely on the first monitor, it > > could reside on the second monitor (and the nowhereland above it) or > > it could be split between the two monitors. > > > > I expect there is no answer to this question, which is frustrating > > because this is a real-life setup that one of my users has talked > > about recently. Perhaps _NET_WM_STRUT_PARTIAL is just not enough, and > > needs to be able to specify the monitor as well as start/length. > > Correct. The strut hints talk about desktop (root window) edges, so they > don't support reserved areas "inside". That basically matches > _NET_WORKAREA, > so if you want to extend one, you probably want to do the same with the > other > one. > > -- > 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 > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:26:13 +0100 > From: Lubos Lunak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: WM features > To: wm-spec-list@gnome.org > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > On Monday 21 of January 2008, kettani lalla fatima zahra wrote: > > Hi all, > > i have a question about window manager's features. Is there any WM that > can > > force an application specific window to behave as a system modal window? > > *I know for example that mwm offers XmNmwmInputMode* resource that can > be > > used by an application to set a system modal window, but i am interested > by > > a customisation that could be done through WM without being invoked by > the > > application it self. > > If by system modal you mean a window that will block all remaining > windows, > then that is generally, with very few exceptions, considered to be evil > and I > doubt you'll get support for something like that. Especially given that > the > few expections work like described in another answer, with override > redirect > and grab. > > > And for screensavers, is there a WM that can allow a program to pop up > over > > a screen saver? > > No. It is up to the screensaver what it allows, or rather not allows, to > be > visible. > > -- > 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 > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 11:19:00 +1100 > From: Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: WM features > To: Lubos Lunak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: wm-spec-list@gnome.org > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:26:13 +0100 Lubos Lunak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled: > > > On Monday 21 of January 2008, kettani lalla fatima zahra wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > i have a question about window manager's features. Is there any WM > that can > > > force an application specific window to behave as a system modal > window? > > > *I know for example that mwm offers XmNmwmInputMode* resource that > can be > > > used by an application to set a system modal window, but i am > interested by > > > a customisation that could be done through WM without being invoked by > the > > > application it self. > > > > If by system modal you mean a window that will block all remaining > windows, > > then that is generally, with very few exceptions, considered to be evil > and I > > doubt you'll get support for something like that. Especially given that > the > > few expections work like described in another answer, with override > redirect > > and grab. > > agreed. irrespective of whatever a spec might say in mwm or netwm - i know > i > would never support such a feature in enlightenment. it simply removes > control > from a user. dialogs that hold your whole screen hostage are just evil. if > you > must do it - then it will be your extra level of work to grab keyboard, > mouse, > and so on - hopefully giving you a dis-incentive to try do this as it > raises > the barrier of entry for the app programmer. > > > > And for screensavers, is there a WM that can allow a program to pop up > over > > > a screen saver? > > > > No. It is up to the screensaver what it allows, or rather not allows, > to be > > visible. > > > > -- > > 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 > > > > > -- > ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- > The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > wm-spec-list mailing list > wm-spec-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/wm-spec-list > > > End of wm-spec-list Digest, Vol 40, Issue 5 > ******************************************* >
_______________________________________________ wm-spec-list mailing list wm-spec-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/wm-spec-list
