Re: RFC: A generic pointer protocol
. Tethys (tethys@lonnds.ml.com)
Fri, 15 Nov 1996 10:25:13 +0000
>> Hmmm... I'm doubtful. I'm currently adding a z-is-pressure flag,
>> but I don't like using the buttons as pressure indication.
>
>Consider it as a simplification for a drawing program. By having a
>guaranteed pressure field, they don't have to worry about processing
>special flags from the record. x, y, buttons, and pressure would always
>give satisfactory results, regardless of what device is being used.
>Plugging 255 (or whatever the max is) into the pressure field when any
>button is pressed on a mouse is dead simple, and would make things much
>simpler for programs.
Why does pressure have to be treated differently? Surely, it's just
another dimension? If we're trying to develop a generic pointer
protocol, why make it specific?
Tet
PS. If all goes well, this should just get through before vger downtime...
--
--==<< ``Reality is for those who can't handle science fiction'' >>==--
--------------------+--------------+----------------------------------------
tethys@ml.com | Micro$oft: | Linux, the choice of a GNU generation.
tet@astradyne.co.uk | Just say no! | See http://www.uk.linux.org for details