Talk:X Window System protocols and architecture
|X Window System protocols and architecture was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.|
|Current status: Delisted good article|
|WikiProject Linux||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
Urgently needed for this article
X Window System was at 30KB and it was clear the technical section would need at least 15KB to do it justice, and was also of notably lower quality than the rest of the article. So I split it off. - David Gerard 13:13, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Things this article needs (add to this list):
- Extensions (only a few are currently mentioned)
I have added some technical details, but there are some points missing: for example, a discussion about screens and visuals. In the examples, I made some simplifying assumptions (for example, in the the example section I have assumed a single screen; when talking about selections, I have assumed that the client is requesting a text selection, etc.) This may be misleading, but explaining everything in the level of details of the specifications is too much. Paolo Liberatore (Talk) 09:25, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
keyboard input with XKB
- Keyboard handling is now in X Window core protocol, and in X keyboard extension. - Liberatore(T) 15:05, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
This article has reached 33k... I propose to split the sections:
- X protocol
- X services
into a new article X Window core protocol, leaving a summary here. The section "Inter-client communication" is also quite long, but I think it can be left in place. Comments? - Liberatore(T) 20:46, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Done. I have removed some things from the list of the things that are missing as they should go to X Window core protocol instead (a new list is in the talk page of that article). - Liberatore(T) 19:01, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
Could somebody knowledgable about X Windows take a look at the article XRandR. It is important? Should it be merged somewhere? deleted? Not sure myself but it seems fairly out of context and of questionable importance by itself... Jefferson Anderson 20:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
"Ken Sanders X-pert on the X protocol" under Obsolete Extensions was added on May 6 by an anonymous edit.
This discussion is transcluded from Talk:X Window System protocols and architecture/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.
In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of August 16, 2008, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR.
- This article is almost entirely unreferenced and has had a request for citation outstanding since May 2008. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 23:26, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
"and sends back user input..."?
The following paragraph doesn't make sense to me:
X is based on a client-server model. An X server program runs on a computer with a graphical display and communicates with various client programs. The server accepts requests for graphical output (windows) and sends back user input (keyboard, mouse).
Why would the server send back user input?
- I grant that sentence could be made clearer. The point is that the server is between the user and the client program. It receives keypresses from the user and send them to the program. I will try to clarify this. Thanks for pointing this out. Tizio 13:35, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Ok, I have changed that sentence. I think it is clear now, but suspect it could be improved as for the language... Tizio 13:42, 10 November 2008 (UTC)