Re: [wmii] Dockapp problem

From: Denis Grelich <>
Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 21:41:04 +0200

On Sun, 21 May 2006 21:15:06 +0200
"Anselm R. Garbe" <> wrote:

> A green label with 'M' could transport the same information. One
> only has to learn the cognition a green label with M means you
> got mail. See such a label as image. With proper UTF8 there
> might be glyphs which look like a letter icon, dunno.

Ah, yes, sure. (After one session of LSD, weed and booze binge drinking, so at least I believe, they decided to add the whole Dingbats font to Unicode …)
But in the end, compared to graphics support, Unicode is much more code overhead.

> > Or, see a traffic graph. You can display the current network
> > load as a absolute number. Or you could display a small graph.
> > A graph is much easier on brain cycles! In addition, it
> > displays the network load's course. You /immediately/ see if
> > there's a peak, a change, or a DDOS/Windows box connected to
> > the LAN ;) Of course you can have several cycling labels or
> > some other ugly insanity. But I don't have to explain how that
> > would be.
> That is a bad example in my eyes, especially if such a graph is
> small. First, the network traffic information is quite useless,
> if such a graph only displays the current load -, second it
> would need much space to be properly usable, 20px of a network
> graph don't tells much. You need at least 40px that such info
> really gains benefits from textual representations like network
> load (e.g. cur: 10kb/s avg5m: 77.8kb/s avg1d: 45kb/s).
> But then you can go and use gkrellm or a dockapp instead.

Dockapps don't fit into the dynamic WM concept at all. And then, it depends of course on how high your bar is. 40 pixels long and 20 height are, imo, enough to give at least a glimpse about the current state of the network. To be honest, I don't see that much more benefit in »cur: 10kb/s avg5m: 77.8kb/s avg1d: 45kb/s.« It translates to me into : »low«, »much«, »not that much.«

> I think this icon stuff should not be implemented. It has too
> less benefit. Supporting instead withdrawn apps in some dockbar
> seems the better solution.

If images are not supported, I can understand that from some POV. But I can't understand if you support dockapps instead. They should not be supported, imho.


Received on Sun May 21 2006 - 21:41:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Jul 13 2008 - 16:06:04 UTC