--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:20 PM, Mike Leimon <[email protected]> wrote: > Luke, > > I took a quick glance at the Wikipedia entry and saw what I thought was an > error and I will fix the problem if you can confirm that I understand the > situation correctly. > > The wikipedia article says the following: > > """ > > There are two different physical profiles of EOMA68 (based around the legacy > PCMCIA classifications):[2] > > 54 mm × 85.6 mm; 5mm variant (Type II) > 54 mm × 85.6 mm; 3.3mm variant (Type I) > > Type I is reserved for up to 1366x768 RGB/TTL video output; Type II is > reserved for up to 1920x1080 RGB/TTL video output, on the basis that a Type > I 3.3mm card may fit into a Type II 5.0mm socket but not vice versa. Thus, a > module with a lower-capacity video output will physically be prevented from > being used with incompatible higher-resolution devices, preventing any > possible confusion about interoperability. type I 3.3mm.... no! that's wrong! well spotted. i believe i added that in a hurry without checking. > """ > > However, as I understand things, the second part of the article is incorrect > and should probably be as follows: > > """ > > Type II is reserved for up to 1366x768 RGB/TTL video output; Type I is > reserved for up to 1920x1080 RGB/TTL video output, on the basis that a Type > I 3.3mm card may fit into a Type II 5.0mm socket but not vice versa. Thus, a > module with a lower-capacity video output will physically be prevented from > being used with incompatible higher-resolution devices, preventing any > possible confusion about interoperability. yep well done for spotting that, please somebody feel free to make the correction. sooner is better.... before yet _another_ person goes and claims "authoritatively" that they're in a position to make factually misleading statements about EOMA68.... *sigh*.... > > """ > > Please respond and let me know if I am understanding this issue correctly > and if so, I'll make this correction to the article after I am back home > from work for the day. > > I'm not sure about any other issues with the article but, when I get a > chance I'll try to take a closer look at it (maybe some time tomorrow). it's not the article itself: it's the fact that... well.... take a look at the wikipedia COI noticeboard, if you dare. we have several people "chipping in" who know "wikipedia rules" but have absolutely f***-all knowledge of what EOMA68 is actually about. they're therefore trying to "clean up" the page... but are substituting factually completely WRONG information in its place. _______________________________________________ arm-netbook mailing list [email protected] http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook Send large attachments to [email protected]
