[RFC] RandR 1.3 properties
sandmann at daimi.au.dk
Fri Nov 7 16:30:24 PST 2008
Matthias Hopf <mhopf at suse.de> writes:
> > ATOMs are obviously supported, but FLOATs seem harder as they aren't
> > described in the core protocol anywhere.
> Thinking about that, adding floats was probably a bull idea. However,
> having semantics about ATOMs might be helpful (e.g. for xrandr or any
> general purpose property setting tool).
We may need them in XRender as well to support higher-precision
coordinates and transformations. They could be specified by just
referencing IEEE 754.
More information about the xorg