Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!columbia!rutgers!ames!sdcsvax!ucbvax!ZERMATT.LCS.MIT.EDU!RWS
From: RWS@ZERMATT.LCS.MIT.EDU (Robert Scheifler)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: re: Proposed Protocol Change to WarpPointer
Message-ID: <870801103807.3.RWS@KILLINGTON.LCS.MIT.EDU>
Date: Sat, 1-Aug-87 10:38:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: KILLINGT.870801103807.3.RWS
Posted: Sat Aug  1 10:38:00 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Aug-87 09:39:45 EDT
References: <8707311548.AA08410@audi.siemens.uucp>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Distribution: world
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 50


    Date: Fri, 31 Jul 87 11:48:43 EDT
    From: ellis@audi (Ellis Cohen)

    In our tiled window manager, we have a move gadget
    to the right of the title bar.
    Clicking on the gadget warps the pointer to the
    middle of the window.
    The user then moves the pointer to another place
    on the screen and clicks again, and this location
    becomes the new center location of the window.

This seems like a perfect example of where a relative warp is a bad
idea, and a conditional absolute warp is a good idea.  The position you
ideally want to end up at (the center of the window) is known
absolutely.  If the window manager suffers a delay in warping, and the
user has since moved the pointer off to the new center and is about to
click, I find it hard to imagine that it is desirable to suddenly do a
relative warp.

What am I missing?

       2.  Some users would inadvertantly click twice, or would
	   click so slowly that we would treat the down and up
	   press as distinct button events.

This seems beside the point, but why should the length of time between
down and up matter?  Why aren't all butten events "distinct"?

					     Either would cause
	   the move to be completed.  Because the pointer was
	   warped to the center, the window would simply stay in the
	   same place in this case.

I don't see how warping (no matter how) affects the situation.  If the
user inadvertantly clicks twice, then they probably do so before you
have a chance to warp the pointer at all.  I don't see how a relative
warp after the second click changes anything.

    You might argue that instead of warping the pointer, we could
    simply blank it out, and track along with our own cursor suitably
    displaced from the pointer.

No, I wouldn't argue that.

    I don't see any way of solving these problems short of a relative
    warp, but I am certainly open to another solution.

I'm still open to the idea of a relative warp, but your description
still doesn't provide me with a justification I can make sense of.