-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
input@position is saying too much? #27
Comments
That is ambiguous since there are many possible column values. I think we need the position to refer to a point location so that there is no ambiguity. |
The point is defined by 2 inputs and not by a single one: The top-left corner is defined by:
inputs are 1-dimensional. |
I can see how this could be confusing. There's no way to compose an object with an input. So my notion here is that the coordinates of the event would be parsed by the input serialization process and the requested axis of the "location" be serialized. I could foresee the concept of providing a template (in an attribute) that could serialize the whole coordinate pair in a custom way (for example reversing the axis order, formatting decimal points ...) but I didn't want to get fancy for no reason at this stage. So having the input@location serialize some part of the location (a single axis value) seemed like a simple solution. |
In the following example:
we can see that axis indicates a direction: "row" or "column", "x" or "y", "i" or "j"...
Then "position" mentions two directions at the same time what is not necessary. I should expect something like this:
This proposal simplifies the current list "input@position" from the current 9 values to 5 values:
Note this discussion is independent of the discussion about adding "tile-" or "image-" exposed in issue #24
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: