On 10/30/2013 11:39 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 05:08:25PM -0700, Daniel Colascione wrote:
On 10/29/2013 05:04 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote:
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 04:24:47PM -0700, Daniel Colascione wrote:
The tiny patch below disables the clickpad hardware "button" when
syndaemon has asked us to disable tapping. Without this patch, I
frequently find myself accidentally clicking while typing.
isn't this a physical button? if so, it'd be better to just disable the
touchpad fully instead of just disabling tapping.
It's a physical button, but it's unlike other physical buttons in
that it takes up the _entire trackpad_. It's a lot easier to trigger
this button than it is to trigger a traditional button, so it really
should be treated as a tap for disablement purposes.
what device is this? if anything it takes me more effort on my clickpad to
press the whole thing than pressing a button on the old-style clickpad.
It's a Lenovo X1 Carbon. All I can do is comment on my annoyance
relative to my hardware.
The idea behind using TOUCHPAD_TAP_OFF instead of TOUCHPAD_OFF is to
allow the user to move the cursor as soon as possible after typing.
I have no idea what the idea behind it is, the git history isn't forthcoming
here.
It's the only reasonable explanation I can think of.
my suspicion is that tapping is a separate entity because accidentally
causing a tap/scroll is a problem, moving a bit usually not (especially when
palm detection sucks)
Yes.
By the time the user gets around to actually clicking something, the
type-inhibit delay will have expired and we'll have turned off
TOUCHPAD_TAP_OFF. This way, the user never notices the delay ---
users will take a few hundred ms to click anyway. If we used
TOUCHPAD_OFF instead, you'd either have to shorten the delay or
cause users more annoyance.
synaptics history teaches me that you don't get to pick between less or more
annoyance, you only get to choose who you're going to annoy...
So you're arguing that all options are equally annoyance, so we
shouldn't change anything?
_______________________________________________
[email protected]: X.Org development
Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel
Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
