From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: jasonr@btinternet.com
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: Gtk version getting closer
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:26:18 +0000 (GMT)
Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
Message-ID: <571957.1037892378356.JavaMail.root@127.0.0.1>
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1037892391 2909 80.91.224.249 (21 Nov 2002 15:26:31 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:26:31 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Return-path: <emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 18EtDo-0000fA-00
	for <emacs-devel@main.gmane.org>; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 16:26:28 +0100
Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 18EtHY-0002kQ-00
	for <emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org>; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 16:30:20 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10)
	id 18EtEp-000711-00; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 10:27:31 -0500
Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10)
	id 18EtDs-0006Lp-00
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 10:26:32 -0500
Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10)
	id 18EtDm-0006KA-00
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 10:26:31 -0500
Original-Received: from actinium.btinternet.com ([194.73.73.66])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10)
	id 18EtDm-0006Jy-00
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 10:26:26 -0500
Original-Received: from lanthanum ([194.75.226.97])
	by actinium.btinternet.com with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #8)
	id 18EtDe-0001u6-00; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:26:18 +0000
Original-Received: from 193.192.75.200 by lanthanum ([194.75.226.97]); Thu, 21 Nov 02 15:26:18 GMT
Original-To: handa@m17n.org, bob@rattlesnake.com
X-Mailer: talk21.com WAS v2
Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Emacs development discussions. <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel/>
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:9600
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:9600

> I think the right thing is to decide the tooltip X/Y offset
> according to the size and position of the rectangle area
> that activates the tooltip, not according to the mouse
> position.

Gnome seems to do this with the Y offset, but the X offset
still follows the mouse. It is definitely a good idea for Y
offsets, as it eliminates totally the possibility of
obscuring the item that activated the tip. I think doing the
same with the X offset might look strange in some
circumstances, and detach the tip from the mouse pointer
too much.