From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi  Sat Apr  2 20:45:51 2005
X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de
Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de
Subject: Re: [MiNT] New AES keyboard messages
From: Petr Stehlik <joy@sophics.cz>
To: "Evan K. Langlois" <Evan@CoolRunningConcepts.com>
Cc: Adam =?iso-8859-2?Q?K=B3obukowski?= <atari@gabo.pl>,
        MiNT <mint@fishpool.com>
In-Reply-To: <1112440170.28763.84.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com>
References: <1111344400.12169.50.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com>
	 <424B0943.3000706@gabo.pl>
	 <1112242300.10960.20.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com>
	 <424B8F47.7040803@gabo.pl>
	 <1112294969.24071.20.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com>
	 <424C65AA.9070900@gabo.pl>  <1112344790.25198.39.camel@joy.sophics>
	 <1112394317.28763.13.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com>
	 <1112433659.6687.2.camel@joy.home>
	 <1112440170.28763.84.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 20:42:40 +0200
Message-Id: <1112467360.6687.2.camel@joy.home>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.3 
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ms1.avonet.cz id j32IggO5008258
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi
Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi
X-original-sender: joy@sophics.cz
Precedence: bulk
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=help>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:mint-request@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <mint.lists.fishpool.fi>
X-List-ID: <mint.lists.fishpool.fi>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at relay.boerde.de
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on relay.boerde.de
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.0 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=BAYES_00
X-Spam-Level: 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by wh58-508.st.uni-magdeburg.de id j32IjpnX021665

Evan K. Langlois píše v So 02. 04. 2005 v 05:09 -0600:
> Personally, I don't think it will be a problem to translate, as long
> as the new event for key-up/key-down is consistent with the returned
> scan-codes for all AES calls.

How about scancodes returned by BIOS? Why should they differ from those
returned by AES?

> The real question was if a move to 16 bit scan-codes is a good idea. 

Well that was not my question.

> A few people are calling me idiots for being against a 16 bit
> scan-code

I think that 7bit for scancode might not be enough for possible extended
keyboards (multimedia keys etc.) but full 8bit ought to be enough for
everybody (yes, I borrowed this sentence from the richest man in the
world).

Petr