[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120509193902.GA12310@polaris.bitmath.org>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 21:39:02 +0200
From: "Henrik Rydberg" <rydberg@...omail.se>
To: Ping Cheng <pinglinux@...il.com>
Cc: Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@...-t.net>,
Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...il.com>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, chatty@...c.fr,
chasedouglas@...il.com, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Input: MT - Include win8 support
Hi Ping,
> > How about ABS_MT_TOOL_X/Y?
>
> I am ok if we use any one of the suggested terms. The term is non
> technical per se. Readers will have to look into the spec to
> understand what exactly it means. But, I'd choose ABS_MT_CENTER_X/Y if
> we can only pick one from the suggested ones.
>
> MT_TOOL_X/Y is unique. But, it introduces TOOL to the term. That makes
> me think about MT_TOOL_FINGER and MT_TOOL_PEN, which are irrelevant to
> this context.
On the contrary, tool as a base makes a lot of sense here. For the
single-pointer case, we have tool types and tool size already. If we
were to add a tool position, we would naturally think of
ABS_TOOL_X/Y. For the MT case, MT_TOOL_* are the tool types, and
ABS_MT_WIDTH_* is the tool size. It was chosen in analogy with
ABS_TOOL_WIDTH, although the TOOL part was dropped in favor of a
shorter name. In retrospect, ABS_MT_POSITION_X should have been named
ABS_MT_TOUCH_X and ABS_MT_WIDTH_MAJOR could have been named
ABS_MT_TOOL_MAJOR. This would more clearly have shown the events being
properties of two objects, tool and touch. With that in mind,
ABS_MT_TOOL_X is a natural choice.
Thanks,
Henrik
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists