Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:42:55 +0100
From: John Bradford <john@grabjohn.com>
Message-Id: <200309221242.h8MCgtMf000302@81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk>
To: aebr@win.tue.nl, ndiamond@wta.att.ne.jp, vojtech@suse.cz
Subject: Translated set 3
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 990
Lines: 24

Sorry if there is an obvious answer to this question that I'm missing,
but what is the advantage of using translation in set 3?

I totally agree that translated set 2 is the way to get 99% of
keyboards working perfectly, and that the reason we use translation
here, is because although untranslated set 2 is simpler, some laptops
don't support this properly, and some that do have problems with BIOS
interpretation of the codes, etc.

However, surely setups that support set 3, will support it equally
well with and without translation?  Here, I don't see the advantage of
enabling translation.

Why not simplify the whole problem, and either have:

* translated set 2 with workarounds for all known strange keyboards
* untranslated set 3

John.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/