On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 8:23 PM, Ron <[email protected]> wrote:

> Running --list with -v will show those numeric assignments in the current
> HEAD code.

Sorry for my ignorance.  I've never bothered to try that (I rely on
Peter so much for xf86-input-wacom, you know :).

>> > The ID matching doesn't go away though so that's always the last option if
>> > the more convenient parameters don't work. The only case where that'd break
>> > is if users assigns numerical device names to their devices. A case of
>> > "don't do that" :)
>>
>> I guess the ID is from xinput. How many different options do we need
>> to go through before we come to this last option?
>
> The ID's are a property of the tool/device, we could ignore them, but I
> don't actually see any other way to address a tool in the case where
> I had 2 identical tablets plugged in, as the long device names are going
> to be the same, no?  (I don't have 2 tablets the same, so I may be wrong)

They are different (I don't have two identical ones at home).  But I
know they are different since I tested before (I don't trust my memory
so much now once you asked :).  I'll be sure tomorrow.


> How (did?) this work for the earlier drivers?

With different identifier (in xorg.conf) or we call it dev_name in xsetwacom.


>> > Given that the majority of users don't have more than one tablet, I think
>> > having tutorials suggest things like "xsetwacom --get ERASOR foobar
>> > something" is a good idea, it applies to most tablets regardless of the
>> > device itself.
>>
>> This limits us to one tool of a type even we only use one tablet for
>> the whole X server.  I have no problem for you guys to add this
>> option.  But I am not convinced to replace
>>
>> xsetwacom --get "dev_name" foobar something
>>
>> with
>>
>> xsetwacom --get type foobar something
>>
>> Then the question is, how do we know which device option we are going
>> to check first: type or dev_name?   This "monster" may be bigger than
>> the dev_name itself :).
>
> Are those ever going to be ambiguous?  We have:
>
> Atom types from xorg: ERASER CURSOR STYLUS etc.
> device_names: '"Wacom Foo" eraser', '"Wacom Bar" cursor', '"Wacom Baz"', ...
> device ids: 8, 9, 10 ...
>
> The device names already have an odd case, because I get no explicit
> stylus device_name, just '"Wacom Graphire3"', but aside from that, they
> are unique if the tablet types are unique.  The Atoms types will only
> be unique if the tool is unique.  The ID's will uniquely address any
> tool, but will not stay constant if devices are unplugged or replugged.

Well, that means we don't consider xorg.conf, which may name a device
with type "stylus" called "stylus"....   I was told xorg.conf will
stay as long as X.Org survives.

> Ok.  eww.  We have some more to tidy up here than I thought ;)

Ugly, isn't it?  That's my life :).


> But I don't think we have much risk of overlap in those 3 namespaces
> do we?  If not, it doesn't really matter what order we search them,
> if we do, well ++eww, I agree, but I'm sure we'll figure something out ...

I am with you - there is always a solution no matter which way we
choose.  We hope we could find and choose the better one instead of
the ugly one as much as we could afford.

Ping

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community
Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support
A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy
Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers
http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev 
_______________________________________________
Linuxwacom-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxwacom-devel

Reply via email to