MacBook Air multitouch trackpad API
-
There was a message on the list asking for an API for the Air's
multitouch trackpad. A little bit of reverse engineering (not mine)
yields a few new NSEvent types and corresponding NSResponder methods
that can be used to receive the default multitouch gestures (swipe,
pinch and rotate):
<http://www.cocoadev.com/index.pl?MultiTouchTrackpad>
- ∞ -
Do not post links to reverse engineered APIs here.
On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:13 PM, ∞ wrote:
> There was a message on the list asking for an API for the Air's
> multitouch trackpad. A little bit of reverse engineering (not mine)
> yields a few new NSEvent types and corresponding NSResponder methods
> that can be used to receive the default multitouch gestures (swipe,
> pinch and rotate):
>
> <http://www.cocoadev.com/index.pl?MultiTouchTrackpad>
-
On Feb 2, 2008 1:15 PM, Scott Anguish <scott...> wrote:
> Do not post links to reverse engineered APIs here.why not?
>
wes -
On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:17 PM, Wesley Smith wrote:
> On Feb 2, 2008 1:15 PM, Scott Anguish <scott...> wrote:
>> Do not post links to reverse engineered APIs here.
>>
> why not?
First, the Mac OS X Software License Agreement says you may not
disassembly or reverse-engineer (This is list not the place to debate
whether or not this would fall under fair use or not)
Second, the discussion of private API is not appropriate to this
list. That includes pointing to other resources. This has been the
policy for a long time now.
Finally, if you have issues with these policies, the list is not the
place to discuss or debate them. Contact the admin address in the
signature.
Now, please take this discussion off-list. -
Well ok,
Did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed today?
best,
wes
On Feb 2, 2008 1:31 PM, Scott Anguish <scott...> wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:17 PM, Wesley Smith wrote:
>
>> On Feb 2, 2008 1:15 PM, Scott Anguish <scott...> wrote:
>>> Do not post links to reverse engineered APIs here.
>>>
>> why not?
>
> First, the Mac OS X Software License Agreement says you may not
> disassembly or reverse-engineer (This is list not the place to debate
> whether or not this would fall under fair use or not)
>
> Second, the discussion of private API is not appropriate to this
> list. That includes pointing to other resources. This has been the
> policy for a long time now.
>
> Finally, if you have issues with these policies, the list is not the
> place to discuss or debate them. Contact the admin address in the
> signature.
>
> Now, please take this discussion off-list.
>
>
>
-
On 2 Feb 2008, at 21:31, Scott Anguish wrote:
> On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:17 PM, Wesley Smith wrote:
>
>> On Feb 2, 2008 1:15 PM, Scott Anguish <scott...> wrote:
>>> Do not post links to reverse engineered APIs here.
>>>
>> why not?
>
> First, the Mac OS X Software License Agreement says you may not
> disassembly or reverse-engineer (This is list not the place to
> debate whether or not this would fall under fair use or not)
Humph... OS X sends me an event on a post card (OK, in an NSEvent),
one it sends to everyone else who has a MacBook Air, and I'm not
allowed to tell people what it says? I agree that this isn't the
place to debate what is and isn't reverse engineering, but the simple
fact is that this isn't.
> Second, the discussion of private API is not appropriate to this
> list. That includes pointing to other resources. This has been the
> policy for a long time now.
That's news. They've been discussed on this list sporadically for a
long time, and this policy is news to me...
> Finally, if you have issues with these policies, the list is not the
> place to discuss or debate them. Contact the admin address in the
> signature.
This list is, however, the place to discuss APIs that are of use and
interest to Cocoa programmers, is it not? Can you suggest a single
other forum in which this information would be more useful or well
targeted?
Nicko -
> Can you suggest a single other forum in which this information would
> be more useful or well targeted?
The Omnigroup OS X dev forum.
See http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-dev
And BTW, a public thank you to the moderators for keeping this list a
stellar resource.
Hal -
Il giorno 03/feb/08, alle ore 09:16, Hal Mueller ha scritto:
>> Can you suggest a single other forum in which this information
>> would be more useful or well targeted?
>
> The Omnigroup OS X dev forum.
> See http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-dev
>
> And BTW, a public thank you to the moderators for keeping this list
> a stellar resource.
I couldn't respond sooner due to me living in CEST and sleeping.
I'm sorry this was off-topic -- I didn't realize it. I'll bring it to
the attention of another forum.
Sorry for the inconvenience,
- ∞ -
On Feb 2, 2008, at 7:22 PM, Nicko van Someren wrote:
> On 2 Feb 2008, at 21:31, Scott Anguish wrote:
>> On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:17 PM, Wesley Smith wrote:
>>> On Feb 2, 2008 1:15 PM, Scott Anguish <scott...> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Do not post links to reverse engineered APIs here.
>>>
>>> why not?
>>
>>
>> First, the Mac OS X Software License Agreement says you may not
>> disassembly or reverse-engineer (This is list not the place to
>> debate whether or not this would fall under fair use or not)
>
>
> Humph... OS X sends me an event on a post card (OK, in an
> NSEvent), one it sends to everyone else who has a MacBook Air, and
> I'm not allowed to tell people what it says? I agree that this
> isn't the place to debate what is and isn't reverse engineering,
> but the simple fact is that this isn't.
From Wikipedia: "Reverse engineering is the process of discovering
the technological principles of a device, object or system through
analysis of its structure, function and operation." In order to
determine that support for the MacBook Air trackpad exists, the OP
had to dig through undocumented private frameworks (or private class
methods in public frameworks) to find what he was looking for.
I'm not qualified to discuss fair use in this case, but it does sound
like reverse engineering.
Another point about discussing private APIs is that some people then
have a tendency to want to use them, rather than waiting for a public
solution or relying on another way of doing something. And some of -
them- don't code defensively so that when Apple removes that API, or
changes how it behaves, their software becomes unstable.
My two cents...
steve -
On Feb 3, 2008, at 12:21 PM, Steve Christensen wrote:
>> On 2 Feb 2008, at 21:31, Scott Anguish wrote:
>>
>> First, the Mac OS X Software License Agreement says you may not
>> disassembly or reverse-engineer (This is list not the place to
>> debate whether or not this would fall under fair use or not)
>
> From Wikipedia: "Reverse engineering is the process of discovering
> the technological principles of a device, object or system through
> analysis of its structure, function and operation."
I agree it's bad form to post private framework info on an Apple-
sponsored mailing list, but it sounds like anyone submitting a
message like, "I'm using NSxxx and the docs say ... but this isn't
what I'm seeing - instead, what appears to be happening is ...."
would also be guilty of reverse engineering and therefore posting
against the rules. Luckily we don't have these kinds of experiences
with the Appkit ;-).
Best,
__jayson
Circus Ponies NoteBook - Organization for a Creative Mind
www.circusponies.com -
Scott Anguish [Moderator] Re: [Moderator] Re: MacBook Air multitouch trackpad API Feb 03 2008, 21:48Guys.
Please, don't debate this here.
Just drop the thread.
On Feb 3, 2008, at 12:21 PM, Steve Christensen wrote:
> On Feb 2, 2008, at 7:22 PM, Nicko van Someren wrote:
>> On 2 Feb 2008, at 21:31, Scott Anguish wrote:
>>> On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:17 PM, Wesley Smith wrote:
>>>> On Feb 2, 2008 1:15 PM, Scott Anguish <scott...> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Do not post links to reverse engineered APIs here.
>>>>
>>>> why not?
>>>
>>>
>>> First, the Mac OS X Software License Agreement says you may not
>>> disassembly or reverse-engineer (This is list not the place to
>>> debate whether or not this would fall under fair use or not)
>>
>>
>> Humph... OS X sends me an event on a post card (OK, in an
>> NSEvent), one it sends to everyone else who has a MacBook Air, and
>> I'm not allowed to tell people what it says? I agree that this
>> isn't the place to debate what is and isn't reverse engineering,
>> but the simple fact is that this isn't.
>
>
> From Wikipedia: "Reverse engineering is the process of discovering
> the technological principles of a device, object or system through
> analysis of its structure, function and operation." In order to
> determine that support for the MacBook Air trackpad exists, the OP
> had to dig through undocumented private frameworks (or private class
> methods in public frameworks) to find what he was looking for.
>
> I'm not qualified to discuss fair use in this case, but it does
> sound like reverse engineering.
>
> Another point about discussing private APIs is that some people then
> have a tendency to want to use them, rather than waiting for a
> public solution or relying on another way of doing something. And
> some of -them- don't code defensively so that when Apple removes
> that API, or changes how it behaves, their software becomes unstable.
>
> My two cents...
>
> steve
