Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760707Ab2EISKD (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2012 14:10:03 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.213.46]:47789 "EHLO mail-yw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750951Ab2EISKB (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 May 2012 14:10:01 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20120509053502.GA30063@polaris.bitmath.org> References: <1336230499-1450-1-git-send-email-rydberg@euromail.se> <20120506182835.GA12221@polaris.bitmath.org> <20120508060221.GA15925@yabbi.bne.redhat.com> <20120508184052.GA23748@polaris.bitmath.org> <20120508235219.GA4067@yabbi.redhat.com> <20120509053502.GA30063@polaris.bitmath.org> Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 11:10:00 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] Input: MT - Include win8 support From: Ping Cheng To: Henrik Rydberg Cc: Peter Hutterer , Benjamin Tissoires , Dmitry Torokhov , Jiri Kosina , chatty@enac.fr, chasedouglas@gmail.com, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1723 Lines: 40 On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 10:35 PM, Henrik Rydberg wrote: > > > > > > Looking at the figure, it is clear that the MT model has two > > > > > centers, > > > > > one for each ellipse. Thus, center is not discriminating > > > > > enough. Perhaps ABS_MT_OUTER_X/Y is more appropriate, then? > > > > > > > > ABS_MT_OUTER_CENTER > > > > > > I appreciate the suggestion, but along two-word combinations, > > > ABS_MT_OUTER_POSITION would integrate better with existing names. Both > > > seem awfully long, though. > > > > problem I see with "outer position" is that I'd associate it with the > > top/left position of whatever "outer" is, not with the center of said > > envelope. that's why I'd argue that "center" should be somewhere in the > > name. > > Top-left does not apply to an ellipse, so that argument makes little > sense for someone looking only at the MT protocol. Given that position > is the actual protocol name for the center of the touching ellipse, > there is hardly any doubt what it means in this context. > > 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. Ping -- 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/