Hi
I'd go with the numbering system if that is the USB HID Spec but I also
like the idea of the descriptive names as well. How about using names
but translating ultimately into numbers? Can OSC be worked in here
somehow so we can deal with descriptive hierarchies and broadcast our
actions easily?? Is there any way to query the devices and get them to
tell you what the buttons do?? Just a few thoughts.
Cheers
Macca
On 14/11/2004, at 4:30 PM, pd-list-request@iem.at wrote:
Message: 4 To: PD List pd-list@iem.at From: Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@eds.org Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:02:43 -0500 Subject: [PD] labeling buttons for [hid]
--Apple-Mail-12--326803946 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
So I wanted to throw out an idea to see what people think. I am working on a cross-platform scheme for naming the buttons on devices like mice, joysticks, tablets, etc. Each OS has its own scheme, with some similarities. But I am making a common scheme so that patches that use [hid] will work on all platforms. Right now, I am wondering how I should label buttons.
MacOS X HID Manager simply numbers the buttons, I think Windows does a similar thing since both are based on the USB HID spec. The Linux input event system uses button names, like btn_left, btn_middle (mice); btn_trigger, btn_base (joysticks); btn_a, btn_select (gamepads); btn_tool_pen, btn_stylus (tablets); with a different naming scheme for each device type.
I started out just copying the Linux system outright for a number of reasons, but now I am thinking that button numbers probably make a lot more sense. Here are some advantages/disadvantages that I see:
button numbers: advantages: more efficient to use floats rather than symbols much easier to implement on MacOS X patches written for buttons on one device would work for other devices (i.e. a patch written for a mouse could be triggered by the buttons of a joystick, tablet, etc.) disadvantages: user has to test the device to find the numbering scheme, rather than reading the label slightly harder to implement on GNU/Linux
Any thoughts, comments, feedback, etc would be appreciated.
.hc
_ ____
There is no way to peace, peace is the way. -A.J. Muste
The USB HID spec is ugly, classic Microsoft design, so I wouldn't want
to go with for that reason alone. I am looking to make this event
system clear and consistent. The [hid] object just provides raw data
in an clear and easy to use format, so you can make your own labels or
OSC scheme with the [hid] data within Pd.
I think button numbers is probably the way to go. But with button
numbers, there is a certain amount of guesswork for knowing which
button number represents which button. btn_trigger is quite
straightforward, btn_1 not as much so.
.hc
On Nov 14, 2004, at 9:14 AM, Macciza Macpherson wrote:
Hi I'd go with the numbering system if that is the USB HID Spec] but I
also like the idea of the descriptive names as well. How about using
names but translating ultimately into numbers? Can OSC be worked in
here somehow so we can deal with descriptive hierarchies and broadcast
our actions easily?? Is there any way to query the devices and get
them to tell you what the buttons do?? Just a few thoughts. Cheers MaccaOn 14/11/2004, at 4:30 PM, pd-list-request@iem.at wrote:
Message: 4 To: PD List pd-list@iem.at From: Hans-Christoph Steiner hans@eds.org Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:02:43 -0500 Subject: [PD] labeling buttons for [hid]
--Apple-Mail-12--326803946 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
So I wanted to throw out an idea to see what people think. I am working on a cross-platform scheme for naming the buttons on devices like mice, joysticks, tablets, etc. Each OS has its own scheme, with some similarities. But I am making a common scheme so that patches that use [hid] will work on all platforms. Right now, I am wondering how I should label buttons.
MacOS X HID Manager simply numbers the buttons, I think Windows does a similar thing since both are based on the USB HID spec. The Linux input event system uses button names, like btn_left, btn_middle
(mice); btn_trigger, btn_base (joysticks); btn_a, btn_select (gamepads); btn_tool_pen, btn_stylus (tablets); with a different naming scheme
for each device type.I started out just copying the Linux system outright for a number of reasons, but now I am thinking that button numbers probably make a lot more sense. Here are some advantages/disadvantages that I see:
button numbers: advantages: more efficient to use floats rather than symbols much easier to implement on MacOS X patches written for buttons on one device would work for other devices (i.e. a patch written for a mouse could be triggered by the buttons of a joystick,
tablet, etc.) disadvantages: user has to test the device to find the numbering scheme, rather
than reading the label slightly harder to implement on GNU/LinuxAny thoughts, comments, feedback, etc would be appreciated.
.hc
__ ____
There is no way to peace, peace is the way. -A.J. Muste
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
"Information wants to be free." -Stewart Brand
-
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
Macciza Macpherson