> > > > 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? Henrik -- 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
