On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 9:02 PM, Alan Griffiths
<alan.griffi...@canonical.com> wrote:
When clients toolkits provide hints to place child surfaces using the
existing functions:
mir_surface_spec_attach_to_foreign_parent();
mir_connection_create_spec_for_tip();
mir_connection_create_spec_for_menu(); or the proposed,
mir_surface_spec_set_placement()
the toolkit wants to know where the child surface actually ends up in
order to render appropriately.
We currently have a policy not to provide any location information to
clients, so I want to be sure that I don't propose anything
controversial.
In discussion with Chris he suggests that sending a
PlacementRelativeToParent{dx, dy} message is the right solution.
Doing this opens up an opportunity for clients to:
1. probe the display boundaries using dummy placement requests. (The
point is to provide the location before they render.)
2. parent (and place) everything they do on a fullscreen surface
(which they can conceal from the user). It does limit them to
surface types that can be parented.
Note step 1 here is unnecessary, and clients can quite happily do this
already - they can already position all their surfaces relative to a
transparent fullscreen surface. The probing is unnecessary - the know
where the boundary of their surface is, and that it's the boundary of
the output.
--
Mir-devel mailing list
Mir-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/mir-devel
