[RFC] RandR 1.3 properties

[Soeren Sandmann]

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.


Soren