Three different tab implementations
cullmann at babylon2k.de
Fri Jan 31 21:37:22 GMT 2003
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Friday 31 January 2003 22:22, Christian Loose wrote:
> Am Freitag, 31. Januar 2003 21:51 schrieb Christoph Cullmann:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> > > Hi Christoph,
> > >
> > > I agree that not having the tab mode available under other WMs is a big
> > > disadvantage of the WM approach. But the lib approach has the
> > > disadvantage that you have to change every single app in order to
> > > provide a tab mode, right?
> > You will have to change every app for wm approach or lib, as atm the apps
> > use their own stuff.
> With "every app" I meant apps that don't provide a MDI mode right now like
> e.g. Cervisia.
but that only makes grouping of windows possible, no automagic mdi
> > > Also the lib approach doesn't provide non-KDE apps with a tab mode like
> > > the WM approach does.
> > Yes, but only that the window manager can handle it won't help any non
> > kde app really more than the kde lib, as they can't rely on features only
> > possible in kwm, can they ?
> Well, fluxbox and pwm can provide a tab mode to the apps without having to
> change somethings in those apps to use this feature. And I maybe we and the
> other WM developers can agree on a standard (NETWM?). I guess this would
> increase the chance that other WMs will provide this feature too.
Only tabs without any interface for the apps to control them help noting
beside makes more room on the desktop, what is nice, but not mdi.
KDE Developer, kde.org Co-Maintainer
http://www.babylon2k.de, cullmann at kde.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the kde-core-devel