Re: Pending EWMH additions

[Matthias Clasen <maclas gmx de>]

> > 
> > Whats the problem in the ICCCM ?
> 
> The MULTIPLE target is the foremost problem; nobody handles it and I'm
> not sure it's possible to do so. There is partial handling; I think
> complete handling may be impossible because there is no limit on length
> or nesting of the request. Also, nobody requests it; yet it is a required
> target for all selection owners.
> 

Whats wrong with the implementations of MULTIPLE in Xt, Tk or gtk ? I 
would expect most selection owners to get MULTIPLE support for free by
using one of these toolkits. I think there is a very practical limit
on the length of the request: the number of supported targets (unless
you want to introduce the even more esoteric targets with parameters -
which would admittedly be very useful for offering services via manager
selections). Nested MULTIPLE requests were probably considered an
obviously silly idea by the ICCCM authors, still it would be a good idea
to explicitly rule out MULTIPLE as indirect target. 

Interestingly the toolkit implementations of MULTIPLE which I've looked
at don't forbit to register a conversion for MULTIPLE, which would then
be used for indirect MULTIPLE targets. That could be called a bug, but
it is completely harmless.

> 
> That nobody really expects full ICCCM 2.0 compliance is insider information.
> 

Well, I *do* expect as full as possible ICCCM2 compliance (thats why I 
implemented manager selections, colormap notify and urgency hint for
fvwm last century).

Matthias