Re: [PATCH 0/4] Alternative approach to MT_TOOL_ENVELOPE

[Henrik Rydberg]

>

> I do think that MT is complex enough that related documentation should
> be in multi-touch-protocol.txt, though. Anywhere I discussed MT in
> evdev-codes.txt I referred the reader to the other file. Henrik, does
> that sound good to you?


Yep, thanks.

>> I think it will be invaluable to document this stuff for driver
>> writers and apps but I'm not sure yet what level needs to be enforced.
> 
> That's the biggest issue I see right now. Do we want black and white
> specificity? For example, using terms like "must" and "may not" etc. Or
> do we want the document to merely hold best practices while not
> proscribing exact details? I think even with exact details we can loosen
> them if needed, but that has its own can of worms.


It will most likely need to be judged on a case-by-case basis.

Thanks,
Henrik
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/