On Fri, 2014-05-23 at 17:00 +1000, Peter Hutterer wrote: > I'm almost sold on normalization since it does reduce the likelihood of > things going wrong. We need to provide the axis resolution to convert back > to the real data though where needed. > > once you provide the axis resolution, it doesn't matter if you provide raw > data unless you also want to provide "raw" resolution, which is excessive. > > so, given that this would be sent down the protocol (and for the limited > resolution) the range should be normalised to uint16_t or uint32_t max, with > the resolution in units/mm or canonicalized where more appropriate. This > would be what goes on the wayland protocol as well then. > > helper functions to convert that back to doubles, or elbows per square ounce > would be part of the wl-client package that parses that protcol, not > libinput. > > that doesn't seem like the worst architecture for both libinput and the > protocol, any comments?
Seems fine to me. As for normalizing values to units/mm or the like, is
there any known conversion for the units the tablet returns for distance
to metric?
Cheers,
Lyude
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
