Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: RFC: A generic pointer protocol | Date | Fri, 15 Nov 1996 10:25:13 +0000 | From | ". Tethys " SYSTEM ADMIN " X" <> |
| |
>> 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
|  |