On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 12:53:12AM +0100, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
On 26 Jul 2010, at 11:48, Rob wrote:
There is something that make me sad with dwm, there is a lack of role
rules for clients. I explain : clients have instance and name using
WM_CLASS, but there is also WM_WINDOW_ROLE which is really important
and useful.
Pardon me for ranting, but WM_WINDOW_ROLE looks like nothing more than
brain-damage from freedesktop.org monks who had to "reason" away
perfectly sound usage of WM_CLASS. I'm upset because this broke a window
manager I got on with rather well, but I honestly wonder how close the
reasoning behind this issue is to that of the 12th-century monks who
wrote down, as a factual example for human life, that a badger when
pursued by dogs would bite it's own balls off because it knew that's what
the dogs were really after!
You would do well to indulge in some cursory research before
opining. WM_WINDOW_ROLE predates the freedesktop project by
quite a long time and serves an entirely different purpose from
WM_CLASS. Nor could it be a freedesktop invention, since by
policy they are all prefixed with _NET_. WM_WINDOW_ROLE is an
old part of ICCCM that deals with session management, not window
identification.
--
Kris Maglione
Deleted code is debugged code.
--Jeff Sickel
