Mikael Jansson (mailing lists) wrote: >>>What I'm thinking of in a multi-display setup like this: >>> >>>A Display is a set of monitors arranged physically in a MxN layout >>>without holes, where M, N >= 1. Displays maps to workspaces 1:1. >>>One >>>can have >= 1 Displays connected to the computer. A workspace >>>cannot be >>>displayed at the same time on > 1 Display. >> >> We call that: RootLayer. :-) > > What exactly do you call a RootLayer? Display? Or something else? A C++ class, your Display. >> Yes, this has been disscussed also on GE Talk: >>http://www.bug-br.org.br/pipermail/glasselevator-talk/2003-November/ >>thread.html >> "Multiple Monitors" > > Even posted some to it, heh. Thing is, at that point I don't think > there were anything nice discussed there. So, the scenario I proposed - > is it what's going to be in app_server, or something else? My setup > would give the user the most flexibility, I think. Everyone says that. :-) >> You have long read, but in the and, as I remember, is has been >>decided >>we should give user more choices. (mapping workspaces to Screens, >>etc) > > Mapping a Workspace to a RootLayer, if my assumption above is correct, > right? ATM, and probably default: each RootLayer has a max of 32 workspaces. Note that RootLayer which may span multiple monitors is not necessary linked with another user (which ATM does not exist) but is simply another... desktop if you want. You will be able to map workspaces between available RootLayers, if you want. Anyway, I'm not convinced we'll be having multiple monitors support working in R1, but we have the framework in place for R2/3. Bye, Adi.