[throwaway82652]

No it's not a toolkit problem, you have a misunderstanding of what specifications are supposed to be. If the existing spec doesn't work for them then you can't expect them to support it. The process of making a spec or standard is not about forcing other projects to follow suit, it's about finding mutual common ground that is agreed upon by everybody.

[Epiphany21]

What you are describing is a toolkit problem. GTK and Qt are not built on top of the X toolkit intrinsics, which is why apps built with them often have poor or non-existent X resource support. Toolkits designed around Xt have this stuff baked in.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Toolkit_Intrinsics

Also I'm not asking anyone to support anything. I'm asking you to know the facts first if you're going to bash a specific piece of technology for lacking functionality (which it doesn't, really).

X11/Xorg bashing is in vouge, for some odd reason, despite it working pretty well for most *nix users. If you want alternatives like Wayland and GTK to succeed, then contribute to those and make them into a desirable upgrade path for X11 server and toolkit users.

Frankly, you have not presented any good arguments that would change my mind on any issue so far.

[throwaway82652]

>GTK and Qt are not built on top of the X toolkit intrinsics

That changes nothing, they have no reason to base themselves on Xt if that doesn't work well for them, which it doesn't for a number of other reasons. Also X was intentionally designed to support multiple toolkits using any underlying library they want, so the designers definitely didn't intend for everyone to use Xt.

>X11/Xorg bashing is in vouge, for some odd reason, despite it working pretty well for most *nix users.

There's no bashing here. These are just the facts. It was a fine thing for the time it was created, it's now obsolete and doesn't work that well anymore. Hindsight is 20/20 and all that. That's the way it goes with things.

>If you want alternatives like Wayland and GTK to succeed

This is a bad way to take the conversation. I don't really care what succeeds. There's no reason to get that invested in any particular solution aimed towards something so fleeting (and lacking in rewards) as the attention of a bunch of random Linux distributions.

But I would say those things have already been largely successful at what they set out to do.

>you have not presented any good arguments that would change my mind on any issue so far.

I don't really care about changing your mind either. If you want to change your mind, that's completely your decision to make. I can only point you towards facts that may illustrate other perspectives.

[Epiphany21]

The above article made false claims. I have refuted them. End of conversation.

[smhenderson]

I have refuted them. Incorrectly though, the article was not wrong, your interpretation is.

[throwaway82652]

If you say so, but I've no idea which article or which claims you're talking about.