Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!boulder!stan!ninja!toml
From: toml@ninja.Solbourne.COM (Tom LaStrange)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re: OSF statements about OPEN LOOK
Message-ID: <1990Sep18.154203.28893@Solbourne.COM>
Date: 18 Sep 90 15:42:03 GMT
References: <1990Sep13.204215.5215@Solbourne.COM> <1990Sep14.172922.27088@alphalpha.com> <826@auto-trol.UUCP>
Sender: news@Solbourne.COM
Reply-To: toml@solbourne.com
Organization: Solbourne Computer, Inc.
Lines: 26

|> 
|>   Please, excuse if I show too much of an ignorance. But I don't see what's
|>   so difficult about adding pushpins to Motif or any other widget set.
|>   I don't understand why Open Look needs a special WM protocol do do that.

The private OL protocol allows a client to tell the window manager what
type of decoration it wants around its window.  This includes a pushpin
and whether or not the pin is in or out.  The window manager also updates a
property on the client window whenever the user changes the state of the
pushpin, persumably so the client can take down the window when the user
unpins it.

Motif has a similar protocol that allows clients to request what type 
of decoration to place on its windows.  Gee, here's an idea, why don't we
try and agree on what this protocol should be rather than having two
different ways to do the same thing?  I'll come back to reality now :-)

Pushpins are a very useful concept, regardless of how they're implemented
or what they look like.

--
Tom LaStrange

Solbourne Computer Inc.    ARPA: toml@Solbourne.COM
1900 Pike Rd.              UUCP: ...!{boulder,sun}!stan!toml
Longmont, CO  80501