Re: x-display-list on the Mac

[YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu]

>>>>> On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 10:49:03 +0000, David Reitter <address@hidden> said:

>> OK, how about this?  x-display-mm-{width,height} are changed so as
>> to keep the dpi values of the main display.

> Sure, that would make it a bit more consistent. However, the -mm-
> functions weren't really my concern.

I've heard that preview-latex uses these functions to display images
in real size.

> Placing frames is a difficult thing if one doesn't know what the
> available screen area is (screen as in total screen, not in the X
> sense).

> What complicates matters is that multiple monitors may be arranged
> so that the total desktop area is not rectangular. Just having
> information about total width and height won't be enough. (And I
> presume that is not a Mac only issue.)

Yes.  Xinerama also supports such configurations.

> Can the notion of "display" (X) approximate each monitor? In a
> situation with two monitors, one could have x-display-list return
> three displays: a main one ("Mac"), and then "1" and "2" or so for
> the other two, separately. Then, x-display-mm/pixel-width/height
> could either return the dimensions of the total area, or of only one
> of the screens.

According to the manual page of X, "the phrase `display' is usually
used to refer to collection of monitors that share a common keyboard
and pointer (mouse, tablet, etc.)."  In that sense, there's only one
"display" on a Mac regardless of the number of monitors.

"Display" and "screen" are established terms in X11, and I think we
should not abuse them.  As I mentioned earlier, the concept you want
has another name "framebuffer" in the X11 (Xinerama) world, and I
think the right thing is to support them in a consistent way on the
relevant platforms.

                                     YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
                                address@hidden