maximised windows

[purslow at sympatico.ca]

040401 Olivier Fourdan wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 22:39, purslow at sympatico.ca wrote:
> KDE acts exactly like xfwm4 (or vice versa, depends on the POV).

yes indeed (i tried it), but that's not a reason for XFCE to imitate it.

>> i tried to present an analysis of what the 'maximise' button now does
>> & the apparent irrationality of its effects: please read it again.
> I did and I don't understand what you mean,
> I don't see the behaviour you describe and I don't see any bug.
> Oh, if you want to be read, don't be so lazy, type the whole words!

yes, i suppose it may be a problem for non-anglophones
-- it came up once concerning messages (not mine) to lynx-dev,
where blind users' speech software had problems with abbreviations --
& i can empathise to the extent that while i can read Montesquieu & Simenon,
i have real trouble with comic strips full of Parisian slang (smile).
i will make a mental note to try to avoid abbreviations for XFCE.

so here's a nice literate version:

'Maximise' does  2  things: (1) increase the size to the largest allowed
& (2) place the window so that the top-left corner (eg)
is at the topmost-left allowable; presumably in the code,
these are separate operations.  (2) is needed
or parts of the enlarged window would unintentionally disappear off-screen.

Once the window has been maximised for the 1st time,
there are then  2  things it may be expected to do on the 2nd occasion:
(1) restore the original size & (2) restore the original position.
However currently, 'demaximise' does only (2), which is incorrect.

Moreover, a test shows that a 3rd hit on the 'maximise' button
continues to change the position without altering the size, surely a bug.

So in fact, can't we all be satisfied?  'Maximise' should always toggle size,
without affecting position after the 1st time,
while position should continue to be alterable irrespective of size.

ça va ?
 
>> you deserve great respect from all of us for originating XFCE,
>> but if the criteria for its features were your own personal preferences,
>> it wd not have become as popular as it has.  that it has shows
>> that XFCE features derive from a consensus among its developers & users.
> Well, if you design software, you know that someone has to make choices
> and in this case it's me. Like it or not.

040402 Jasper Huijsmans wrote:
> Well, yes and no. Consensus is nice,
> but when there are differences of opinion it helps to have one 'authority'
> to make the final decision. For xfce that authority is Olivier.
> It's ok to ask though and to argue for a different behaviour ;-)
> Our opinions are not set in stone. More like written in the sand, actually,
> on a beach, near the water, just before the water starts to rise ...

no question, Olivier deserves to retain the final word,
but surely only after an adequate discussion of alternatives.
i'm sure he would be flattered to be compared with Descartes,
a man whose elegant logic was vital to the growth of modern science,
but hopefully not to that more controversial character from Corsica (grin).

[resuming OF]
>> please have another look.
> I can change the code so that the maximize flag remains
> when moving a maximized window, but that's all I can agree on
> even then, I don't agree, but I change this on popular demand.

040402 Jesse Wagner wrote:
> That's a fine solution to the problem
> which I see as losing your unmaximized state when you move a window.

so thanks for having another look & it seems everyone will be satisfied.

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : purslow at chass.utoronto.ca
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto