On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >> >> I guess this is where our disconnect lies as when I am looking at the >> event names I view all *_MT_* events as related to the multitouch >> protocol handling. >> > > Yes. It is true that slot control is MT related, but I am looking at this from > the perspective of future expansions like KEY_MT, KEY_REL, and such, finding a > way to signal to user space which events are handled via slots. If we had > ABS_MT_SLOT, we would most likely get applications which store ABS_MT_SLOT as an > attribute of the slot together with ABS_MT_POSITION_X, ABS_MT_TOUCH_MAJOR, etc, > which is just not right. Why is it not right? Do you mean ABS_SLOT can be used as a label for both _MT_ and non _MT_ events while ABS_MT_SLOT can not? > So the proposal is ABS_SLOT. I haven't convinced myself with this proposal yet. Can you explain the difference between ABS_SLOT and ABS_MT_SLOT with a concrete example? Fool always ignores Mark Twain's advice, you know :). Ping -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
