Hi! > > I'm skeptical about adding now a property for a device that we don't > > support, because we -now- think it's a good idea. I might be wrong, > > but my assumption is that when someone will want to support an > > 'advanced' device, it's easy to add "movable" or whatever else to the > > list of accepted properties values. Am I wrong in assuming this? As > > long as "front" "back" and "external" will stay supported for backward > > DTB compatibility it should be fine, right ? > > The basic rule is that you should not define things unless you KNOW that > they will be needed. So when we actually see new devices for which > "front", "back" or "external" does not fit, then new names can be > created. > It's impossible to cover all situations since we can't predict the future. > The best we can do is to allow for future extensions. Those devices are already being sold, and yes, they are running linux (with some patches probably). I believe it would be better to specify "this camera is selfie -- takes pictures of the user" vs. "this is main camera -- takes pictures of what user is looking at". Best regards, Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
