[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Infrastructural complexity.
From: |
martin rudalics |
Subject: |
Re: Infrastructural complexity. |
Date: |
Sat, 18 Jul 2009 15:49:41 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) |
> I recall that we had an inconclusive discussion over the relative merits
> of two proposals, one by Joakim that (IIRC) relied on window parameters,
> and another by Martin that uses more built-in code. Does anyone have
> any new thoughts about this?
From earlier discussions I'm fairly convinced of one thing: A window
group should correspond to an internal window. IIRC Klaus Berndl
confirmed that ECB configurations always form rectangles so there should
not be problems with ECB. If, however, someones wants to combine
non-rectangular subregions of a frame to form a group, this approach
won't work (in that case, however, a number of features like cloning a
window group into a separate frame would have no intuitive solution
anyway).
FWIW, the following issues are still unresolved:
- Whether we should allow nested or intersecting window groups. This is
a fundamental issue.
- Whether we want special naming conventions for window groups and
whether we should permit unnamed window groups. This is not a serious
issue since all this can be easily resolved on top of internal windows
but would be good to know.
- Whether, which and how window properties (fixed-size, dedicated, ...)
apply to window groups. This is a subtle issue since a fixed-size
window group should probably allow to vary the sizes of the individual
windows within the group but not the size of the rectangle covered by
the group. A dedicated window group would likely forbid to replace
the entire rectangle by something else and allow to replace the
contents of individual members of the group but this seems far less
intuitive already.
- Whether and how window groups interact with window parameters: We can
easily extend window parameters to apply to internal windows and, as a
rule, store all group relevant information there - like, for example,
whether `delete-other-windows' invoked within a window of a group
should delete all other members of that group or all other windows of
the containing frame.
- Whether and how window groups can be distinguished visually within the
containing frame.
martin
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., (continued)
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/29
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/29
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/30
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/30
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/31
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/31
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/31
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/31
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Thomas Lord, 2009/07/22
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/23
- Re: Infrastructural complexity.,
martin rudalics <=
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Juri Linkov, 2009/07/16
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/18
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Juri Linkov, 2009/07/18
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/18
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Stefan Monnier, 2009/07/19
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., martin rudalics, 2009/07/19
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/19
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Juri Linkov, 2009/07/19
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Lennart Borgman, 2009/07/19
- Re: Infrastructural complexity., Juri Linkov, 2009/07/19