Input device design
Waldo.Bastian at intel.com
Fri Aug 26 04:51:33 PDT 2005
On Thursday 25 August 2005 19:37, Joe Krahn wrote:
> I have over the last several years made efforts to work with XInput, but
> never had sufficient knowledge of the X server internal design goals,
> and have been waiting for a LONG time for this to the top of Jim Getty's
> work pile.
> I've written some of my ideas to http://wiki.x.org/wiki/XOrgInputDriverSpec
> It seemed the interest has been too low. Maybe it's finally time to get
I have read it with much interest :-)
> Questions and more ideas:
> Are people in favor of implementing the traditional core devices as
> permanent virtual devices, with one or more real devices sending core
> events through the virtual devices? The virtual pointer would always be
> absolute, screen-resolution, and update with RandR.
Yes, I think it's the best way to handle disappearing physical devices.
> There needs to be a system service that tracks available input devices.
> Should there also be an X client device manager that maps in those
> devices, sort of like a Window Manager? This would allow for user-prefs
> of devices names, sensitivities, etc.
Yes, I think there should although it should probably not be an X client, but
instead use a separate communication channel with the X server.
I have attached a previous message on the topic, (the list archive doesn't
seem to like it much) See also http://wiki.x.org/wiki/XHotplugProposal.
> It is a good idea to avoid using the system level combined pointer-input
> device /dev/input/mice, and let multiple devices be seen as multiple
> devices by X. The X client can then decide if a newly plugged in device
> should be accepted as a core-input device.
Yes, this seems to be a necessity in order to make proper use of more complex
input devices like tablets.
> There's been a lot of discussion on how to map specific input devices. I
> don't think the X server should have to think about USB HUB routes,
> etc., to define a device. Input devices management should be a bit more
> like IP address / routing management. Devices get a name, possibly a
> generic DHCP-like name, and things like X that want to actually use them
> should require minimal knowledge of the hardware. Good/Bad?
On Linux udev and HAL already provide functionality to identify devices in a
meanigful way and I think that's something that should be taken advantage of.
> There also needs to be a generic client/server protocol for input
> devices, which can be used to connect remote devices, emulate devices,
> or provide a way to connect new hardware that does not yet have proper X
> driver support. Something like UPnP is needed, but UPnP is overly
> complex for simple input device purposes, and still incomplete. Also, MS
> has a patent for device communication via XML. I was thinking of a
> trivial UPnP-like protocol using ConciseXML. ConciseXML is less verbose,
> and is IMHO a better fit to data than is regular XML, plus helps avoid
> conflicts with the UPnP people and/or the MS patent.
> Joe Krahn
> xorg mailing list
> xorg at lists.freedesktop.org
Linux Client Architect - Channel Software Operation - Intel Corporation
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: Waldo Bastian <bastian at kde.org>
Subject: Re: Input Devices
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2005 12:41:10 +0200
More information about the xorg