On 2/13/08, Mark Tiefenbruck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here's one more suggestion for a format. There seems to be some > difficulty about what the bounds for the window should actually be. > Should the window fully contain all monitors listed or be fully > contained by all monitors listed? Or something different? I don't > think any of the suggestions have really addressed this. Perhaps the > most versatile approach (without giving complete control to the > application) is to specify four monitors, one for each edge. Then, for > example, the top edge of the window would be aligned with the top edge > of the corresponding monitor, and the same logic would apply to the > other three edges.
I think that this models what is actually trying to be requested better than the previous four suggestions. I think it may be worth defining what would be expected when a specified monitor disappears or resizes though. This option also requires some more complcated code in any app that lets you change this hint, as it needs to pick different monitors based on how they fit together, but with the advantage of letting apps really specify what they mean. The monitor indices approach is problematic as there are many monitor configuration requests whose correct behaviours are completely undefined, such as choosing 1 and 2 from below: ------------- | 1 | 3 | 2 | ------------- The upper limit on the number of monitors is also troubling. dana _______________________________________________ wm-spec-list mailing list wm-spec-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/wm-spec-list
