_NET_WORKAREA and Xinerama

[Oleg Sukhodolsky]

On 10/26/06, The Rasterman Carsten Haitzler <raster at rasterman.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 23:54:29 +0400 "Oleg Sukhodolsky" <son.two at gmail.com>
> babbled:
>
> > Ok, if _NET_WORKAREA is too restrictive and Xinerama is one case which
> > shows the problem.  Are there any plans to change spec to resolve this
> > problem?
>
> don't look at me. :) you have to get this past the people who control the spec.

I though that this list is a right place to ask/discuss this.  Or all
such people gone to other aliases ;)

Oleg.

>
> > Thanks, Oleg.
> >
> > On 10/25/06, The Rasterman Carsten Haitzler <raster at rasterman.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 19:38:05 +0400 "Oleg Sukhodolsky" <son.two at gmail.com>
> > > babbled:
> > >
> > > > On 10/24/06, The Rasterman Carsten Haitzler <raster at rasterman.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 18:06:43 +0400 "Oleg Sukhodolsky"
> > > > > <son.two at gmail.com> babbled:
> > > > >
> > > > > > But results you will have may differ from the area which WM consider
> > > > > > as workarea.
> > > > >
> > > > > correc - the wm gets to decide how to figure it out. the user then gets
> > > > > to tell the wm what algorithm or method to use (minimum area, generous,
> > > > > shaped, maximum etc. etc.)
> > > >
> > > > So, if we want to be consistent with WM we have to use _NET_WORKAREA,
> > > > but it doesn't work for Xinerama and this returns us to beginning of
> > > > the discussion :(
> > >
> > > no - _NET_WORKAREA is broken in that it defines a single area only. if you
> > > define such region(s) by simply placing panels or "fake obstacles" around
> > > the edges of your screen, the wm can figure out what the workarea is - the
> > > wm then can handle maximizing and fullscreening of windows as it sees fit
> > > based on it's interpretation. wrt. filemanager's icons i can see how not
> > > knowing this area can then be a problem - but the fact that it is just a
> > > simple rectangle is  too limiting. i.e.:
> > >
> > > # = panel.
> > > . = current workarea
> > > : = actual usable workarea
> > > +----------------------+
> > > |##::::::::::::::::::##|
> > > |......................|
> > > |......................|
> > > |......................|
> > > |:::::::::::::::#######|
> > > +----------------------+
> > >
> > > the old "workarea" limits you to the "." region. in theory icons windows
> > > etc. can be placed and "maximised" to use the ":" regions too. the "work
> > > area" is a region of "rectangles" where count is >= 1 that together form a
> > > shape/region. imho something (let's say the wm) is in charge of taking the
> > > obstacles ("#" windows) and figuring out what regions outside these windows
> > > it wants to use for what. xinerama just extends this model to the below:
> > > +----------------------+----------------------+
> > > |##::::::::::::::::::##|####::::::::::::::::##|
> > > |......................|:.....................|
> > > |......................|#.....................|
> > > |......................|#.....................|
> > > |:::::::::::::::#######|----------------------+
> > > +----------------------+
> > >
> > > for example. so what you actually need is a way of defining N regions with
> > > each using M rectangles.
> > >
> > > 2 ways to do this.
> > > 1. provide multiple windows - never map them, set their shape. add
> > > properties to them so any app can find them (make them immediate children
> > > of root). then u can get their shape. problem - this relies on the shape
> > > extension existing. a pretty good bet these days, but maybe in principle a
> > > bad thing to have as a standard for netwm stuff.
> > > 2. extends the workarea property and place it on 2 windows (as above) and
> > > allow N sets of co-ords (N*4 card's) and thus be able to have multiple
> > > regions each with multipe rects. wm should list the largest (main rect)
> > > first to save extra processing by clients - but the extra rects can cover
> > > all the other extents that can be used too.
> > >
> > > > Oleg.
> > > >
> > > > > > Oleg.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/24/06, The Rasterman Carsten Haitzler <raster at rasterman.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 17:06:57 +0400 "Oleg Sukhodolsky"
> > > > > > > <son.two at gmail.com> babbled:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I need to know workarea, but it looks like it doesn't work well
> > > > > > > > for Xinerama : (
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I've found couple discussions on this subject:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/wm-spec-list/2003-March/msg00003.html
> > > > > > > > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/wm-spec-list/2004-March/msg00000.html
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So, are there any plans to enhance the spec to work well with
> > > > > > > > Xinerama?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > personally i think workarea is not that useful - "work area"(s) can
> > > > > > > be calculated FROM known obsctacles on screens (like panels, etc.
> > > > > > > etc.). all you need is a way of providing virtual obstacles.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks, Oleg.
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > xdg mailing list
> > > > xdg at lists.freedesktop.org
> > > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------
> > > The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler)    raster at rasterman.com
> > > 裸好多
> > > Tokyo, Japan (東京 日本)
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > xdg mailing list
> > xdg at lists.freedesktop.org
> > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
> >
>
>
> --
> ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------
> The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler)    raster at rasterman.com
> 裸好多
> Tokyo, Japan (東京 日本)
>