Thiago suggested in a comment on PR 1605 [0] that the proposed EXTENDED and EXTENDED_UTILITY stage styles might not be needed, and that the "extended client area" attribute might be a toggle that is independent of the stage style. This would allow users to, for example, combine an extended client area with a transparent window.
While I think that the EXTENDED style is semantically quite different from all the other stage styles, and as such should be its own stage style, the idea has some merit. But instead of making "extended-ness" an independent attribute, we should look at the TRANSPARENT and UTILITY styles. The argument for those two being separate stage styles is a lot less convincing. Both of these could easily be independent attributes: Stage.initTransparency(boolean) and Stage.initUtility(boolean). The existing TRANSPARENT style would then be equivalent to the UNDECORATED style with the initTransparency(true) attribute, while the existing UTILITY style would be equivalent to the DECORATED style with the initUtility(true) attribute. As for PR 1605, this would also eliminate the EXTENDED_UTILITY style. That would leave us with only three main stage styles [2]: DECORATED, UNDECORATED, EXTENDED. We would deprecate all other styles (but probably not for removal). Having these two attributes as independent toggles would enable more customization, and it would also solve another enhancement request that asks for a utility-style undecorated transparent window [1]. What do you think of this idea? [0] https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/1605 [1] https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8091566 [2] not counting UNIFIED, which seems to be of questionable use
