On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 2:21 AM, Alan Griffiths
<alan.griffi...@canonical.com> wrote:
On 02/09/16 15:44, Alan Griffiths wrote:
On 02/09/16 15:42, Thomas Voß wrote:
This only works in the fullscreen case and I
cannot think of a scenario where this impacts overall
user experience. The app already is the one "owning" the display in
fullscreen.
Why would you think it only work in the fullscreen case?
there was an IRC conversation to sort this out between myself William
and Thomas.
I think the resulting consensus was:
1. Mir will constrain the placement anchor of the aux_rect to the
parent surface. I don't think we agreed exactly how (e.g. do we
"clip" the rect? What happens if there is *no* intersection?)
This is easy. The client knows all the information required to ensure
this, so if any part of the placement anchor is outside the parent
anchor, we fail the request.
2. Mir will constrain the the offset placement anchor to the parent
surface. Again I don't think we agreed how. (Slide it horizontally
and/or vertically the minimum amount?)
If any part of the offset placement anchor is outside the parent
surface, we fail the request. ☺
3. Mir will provide a new notification of the placement rectangle.
4. Clients can then probe the display boundaries:
E.g.
MirRectangle aux { 0, 0, 0, 0 };
auto const surface_spec =
mir_connection_create_spec_for_tip(connection, a_big_width, ...);
mir_surface_spec_set_placement(
surface_spec, &aux,
mir_placement_gravity_northwest, // rect anchor
mir_placement_gravity_northeast, // surface anchor
mir_placement_hints_resize_x,
0,
0);
Will result in a "tip" surface whose width is the distance to the
left hand side of the screen.
5. Clients using the result of such probing may get stupid results.
We don't care.
--
Mir-devel mailing list
Mir-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/mir-devel
