Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!panda!genrad!decvax!gancarz
From: gancarz@decvax.UUCP (Mike Gancarz)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re:  window manager property semantics
Message-ID: <170@decvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 12-Oct-87 14:28:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: decvax.170
Posted: Mon Oct 12 14:28:21 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 13-Oct-87 06:48:14 EDT
Reply-To: comp.windows.x
Followup-To: comp.windows.x
Organization: Ultrix Engineering Group, Digital Equipment Corp.
Lines: 41
Keywords: window manager, property, WM_HINTS

In article <> ellis@cadillac.siemens.COM (Ellis Cohen) writes:

  >> Summary: I believe applications should be written to work equally well (or
  >> perhaps better) with a window-manager as without one. 
  >
  >The truth of the matter is that there will inevitably be a window manager
  >present.  Real soon now, there will be a variety of intelligent ones to
  >choose from, and it will make sense for applications to interact with them
  >appropriately.  We're in a transition now, where there are no good window
  >managers generally available, and yet people want their applications to run.

There is no guarantee that a window manager will be present.  Suppose
the window manager only runs when the user initiates some action?  One
of those already exists under X10 and is used by most people here. (At
least the ones still running X10!)  I could imagine a window manager run
by a clock, too.  X is a system that encourages people to change user
interfaces to suit the task at hand.  Those interfaces won't necessarily
reflect your view of the world.

  >Still, I think application writers should write their applications so that
  >when good window managers are available, the application will work correctly
  >with them.  I think that means that applications should use a switch to mean
  >"dumb or no manager", since in 6-9 months, that will be a special case.

Since there are likely to be far more applications around than window
managers, application writers are going to do whatever suits them.  The
most effective window managers will be those that are flexible enough to
be used with the greatest number of applications.  And remember that, as
use of X becomes more widespread, not all applications writers will be
X-perts.  The most useful window managers will be the ones that are the
most forgiving.

Adding a switch to every application seems silly.  The software should
be smart enough to figure that out on its own.  Better yet, it shouldn't
care.  That's what all the extra event crud in X11 is for.

By the way, *good* window managers are already available under X11.  When
*different* window managers come along, I'll be happy to give them a
spin.  After all, variety is the spice of life.

--Mike