[PATCH libinput 2/3] Implement support for pen barrel rotation

2014-12-08 Thread Jason Gerecke
Some Wacom tablets can report the rotation of the pen about its barrel in the ABS_Z axis. Report this via LIBINPUT_TABLET_AXIS_TWIST. Signed-off-by: Jason Gerecke killert...@gmail.com Acked-by: Peter Hutterer peter.hutte...@who-t.net --- src/evdev-tablet.c | 6 ++ src/evdev-tablet.h | 6

Re: [PATCH libinput 2/3] Implement support for pen barrel rotation

2014-12-08 Thread Bill Spitzak
Why not call it Z instead of TWIST? I'm pretty certain that is a common term for this movement, and that twist is a rather strange term (roll is used more). And Z has the advantage that it also implies that counter-clockwise is positive. On 12/08/2014 09:59 AM, Jason Gerecke wrote: ---

Re: [PATCH libinput 2/3] Implement support for pen barrel rotation

2014-12-08 Thread Jon A. Cruz
On 12/08/2014 12:13 PM, Bill Spitzak wrote: Why not call it Z instead of TWIST? I'm pretty certain that is a common term for this movement, and that twist is a rather strange term (roll is used more). And Z has the advantage that it also implies that counter-clockwise is positive. In that

Re: [PATCH libinput 2/3] Implement support for pen barrel rotation

2014-12-08 Thread Peter Hutterer
On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 12:13:17PM -0800, Bill Spitzak wrote: Why not call it Z instead of TWIST? I'm pretty certain that is a common term for this movement, and that twist is a rather strange term (roll is used more). And Z has the advantage that it also implies that counter-clockwise is

Re: [PATCH libinput 2/3] Implement support for pen barrel rotation

2014-12-08 Thread Bill Spitzak
You are right that the fact that it is along the pen is not obvious from Z. However this is actually true of X and Y (one of them could be the angle in the plane defined by the other tilt). Roll probably is good, but it still seems to me that Z is more common, also it looks like the evdev

Re: [PATCH libinput 2/3] Implement support for pen barrel rotation

2014-12-08 Thread Jason Gerecke
My primary complaint is that X and Y are both translational axes, and by analogy Z should be as well. Using it as the name for a rotational axis just muddies things, especially when we already have DISTANCE. My second complaint is the same as Peter's: it should be clear that is axis is in the