WM_NAME vs. _NET_WM_NAME

[Florian Bruhin]

(Cc'ed the hlwm mailinglist because of [2])

First of all, I hope this is also the right place to ask questions,
rather than developemnt of the wm-spec -- if not, I'd be glad if
someone directed me to the right place.

While developing a Qt application, I noticed some bugs regarding to
window title handling [1][2][3].

It seems the Qt toolkit only sets _NET_WM_NAME and doesn't set WM_NAME
at all. Now that raises some questions:

- Should a client also set WM_NAME when setting _NET_WM_NAME? Sure,
  it's a good idea for backwards-compatiblity, but is it warranted to
  open a bug against Qt? (I'd say yes, but I'd like to hear other
  opinions).

- Should a window manager which implements EWMH act correctly when a
  client sets _NET_WM_NAME but not WM_NAME? (see [2])

- Should a client reading other client's titles respect _NET_WM_NAME
  (see [3] - it probably *should* but doesn't *have to*, right?)

Thanks,

Florian

[1] https://github.com/The-Compiler/qutebrowser/issues/198
[2] https://github.com/herbstluftwm/herbstluftwm/issues/35
[3] https://github.com/The-Compiler/qutebrowser/issues/216

-- 
http://www.the-compiler.org | me at the-compiler.org (Mail/XMPP)
             GPG 0xFD55A072 | http://the-compiler.org/pubkey.asc
         I love long mails! | http://email.is-not-s.ms/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://listi.jpberlin.de/pipermail/hlwm/attachments/20141027/f056ff51/attachment.sig>