[Q] Country flag exceeding display space - About xda-developers.com

hi,
when i have an avatar in my profile my country flag exceeds the permitted display space on the left side of a post. how can i fix this ?

mjehan said:
hi,
when i have an avatar in my profile my country flag exceeds the permitted display space on the left side of a post. how can i fix this ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you make a longer post, it will be fine. It's a template bug.

This hasn't been fixed yet?
I had to put some blank characters in my signature,
(this is a workaround for people who mostly make short posts)

Related

Holy Quran WVGA - optimised for WVGA 2 pages on-screen

This Qur'an Viewer was developed for my own use and will be invaluable to anyone who has memorised the Quran and wants to view two-pages at once so that it looks very similar to the mushaf.
Two types of Indo-Pak script are available, as well as two types of Uthmani script.
WVGA (800x480) resolution is an absolute necessity to run this application, any higher or lower resolution will probably not work properly and has not been tested.
You may find the size of the script is a little small, but as a Hafiz I find it invaluable as a quick reference when out and about.
You can click the page to move next/previous. You can also click the upper part of the page to go next/previous juz or surah.
You can choose from three bookmark positions, which will automatically remember your page position on each of the three virtual bookmarks.
Download it here. Unzip and see readme.txt for full installation instructions:
http://www.acclaimit.co.uk/downloads/HolyQuranWVGA_Release_20091001.zip
*** Please completely uninstall the previous Quran13Line application if you installed it before. This new application uses all new script images and a different folder structure. ***
Screenshots attached.
Jazzak Allah Khair
Could you please tell me which screen resolutions are compatible ?
qvga,vga,wqvga,wvga ???
Thank you
I'm sorry, WVGA (800x480) resolution is an absolute necessity to run this application, any higher or lower resolution will not work and has not been tested.
Thank you very much
DOWNLOADED AND INSTALLED
It is wonderful !
But could we get better Pictures ? with better script ?
Jazak-Allah, I'm glad it works. I tried my best to make the pictures look good using the 480 pixels page height so that we can fit two pages on-screen at a time. It's not going to be possible to make it any better unless we have more pixels to play with, or do you have any alternative ideas?
What do you mean by better script? Which part of the script are you having difficulty with exactly?
Thanx for your reply
I meant a different set of pictures, even the 15 line ones
attached are two samples (Zipped with WinZip)
and if you like, I can guide you to the link where you will be able to download the whole set of the first or the second sample.
Thanx again
I see. You forgot the attachments.
Please let me know the link to the whole sets of any other images you know of and I'll see what I can do... 15 or other lined ones, but I will have to rename the application too
I've resized the sample images to 480-pixel height. See attached.
I think the script on these images is much finer than the 13-line ones and is unreadable with two pages on-screen at a time. It would make more sense to show a full page at a time for the 15-line ones, which does not quite fit with the original design goal of this application.
I guess the answer would be to create a new application called "Quran15Line" showing one page at a time, but I am not sure how many people would be interested in this. Poll?
So? have you checked the samples ?
I guess the images without the frames can be visualised better especially when two of them are joined together on a horizontal WVGA screen, right ?
waiting for your reply
Well, as I have mentioned in my previous post, ( sorry just seen ur answer ), the ones without the frame are better.
Regarding your suggestion of the "Single Page", I don't think too many people will be interested in it since the images are originally taken from a software with a single page, full screen style.
These are the links to the 'non frame images' try them and give me your feedback ( Horizontal and Vertical )
http://www.4shared.com/file/96364556/390c2fa6/v_wvga.html
http://www.4shared.com/file/97539687/b3476020/h_wvga.html
Thanx again
Ahh, about your attachment, in fact they both seem readable ! and do not forget that this software is intended for a 'two page style' which means that it is obviously with smaller pages.
I am so interested in the new images !
hope you can make them.
and regarding the software, you can change the options in the TOOLS key, to 13 lines ( your old images ) and 15 lines ( my suggested images ) !
What do you think ???
Jazakhallah Khair Brother Ashiq
Inshallah you will receive Sadqah Jariya every time i use it
this is what i have been looking for for ages
if you do update it can you consider a transalation in english which corresponds to same
13 line quran if possible,maybe i am asking too much
but thanks anyway
Salaams
I was already considering English translation which should correspond with the script. However, it will take a while to do this because there are so many English translations and because we have tell the application which aayaat are on each page so that they can be matched up to the translation. It may take a few weeks, but Insha-Allah I will work on it during any spare time I have.
jaguaralani said:
These are the links to the 'non frame images' try them and give me your feedback ( Horizontal and Vertical )
http://www.4shared.com/file/96364556/390c2fa6/v_wvga.html
http://www.4shared.com/file/97539687/b3476020/h_wvga.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
bro what difference with this?
Code:
http://www.4shared.com/file/134351630/60362269/h_wvga-800x480-medina2.html
http://www.4shared.com/file/134114828/f2fe41e9/v_wvga-480x800-medina2.html
thanks bro
we need another resolutions plz
thanks alot
there is a collection of indopak script at pdaquran .com
which is clearer to read as it is a page per screen
wonder if you you could use the images in you excellent software
ibrahimh said:
there is a collection of indopak script at pdaquran .com
which is clearer to read as it is a page per screen
wonder if you you could use the images in you excellent software
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This application is designed for WVGA to show two pages per screen, so unfortunately I cannot use the pdaquran images. I would urge you to contact pdaquran and ask them to provide you with a Windows Mobile application (they already provide an iPhone one). In any case, couldn't you just download the PDF and view it using Adobe Reader one page at a time?
Dear monzoyt and all - thank you for the various uthmani images you sent - I am currently preparing the Uthmani/Madinah images and will release a new application within a few days InshaAllah.
It takes a while because I have cropped the images to maintain high quality after resizing and need to also match up the bookmarks to the page numbers, and also need to render the page numbers in arabic on the page sides due to the fact that the images do not have enough space to render the page numbers at the top.
monyozt said:
bro what difference with this?
Code:
http://www.4shared.com/file/134351630/60362269/h_wvga-800x480-medina2.html
http://www.4shared.com/file/134114828/f2fe41e9/v_wvga- -medina2.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
800x480 and 480x800, landscape and portrait screen mode!

Those huge signatures ...

To moderators,
Please, please, please ... reduce the size allowed to signatures
Some users have endless signatures, with many graphics, pictures ... it makes threads difficult to read
Ok, I use AdBlock Plus to remove many, but that´s an endless fight
Cheers
ChefChaudart said:
To moderators,
Please, please, please ... reduce the size allowed to signatures
Some users have endless signatures, with many graphics, pictures ... it makes threads difficult to read
Ok, I use AdBlock Plus to remove many, but that´s an endless fight
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Click the link in my sig please would you say those signatures there are too big , I will happily resize them if they are , their resolution is 600*200 and btw. Moderators will ask members with over sized sigs to resize them
ChefChaudart said:
To moderators,
Please, please, please ... reduce the size allowed to signatures
Some users have endless signatures, with many graphics, pictures ... it makes threads difficult to read
Ok, I use AdBlock Plus to remove many, but that´s an endless fight
Cheers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Size of the signature is already greatly restricted by the number of characters in it.
If someone puts care into their signature, the number of characters could be much greater, but take up less screen space. Just changing the color counts as characters.
The total vertical pixels of all images in signatures could could have a limit, which would prevent the signatures that are blatantly too large.
Often times using more characters can actually reduce the total screen space taken up by the signature.
For instance posting a raw URL takes up more screen space than embedding it as something like
using { and } in place of [ and ]
{URL=the raw URL}link{/URL}
By doing this, many links can all appear on one line.
Rather than modifying the site to automatically restrict this, I think enforcement would probably be better done by making a site policy to not have obscenely large signatures.
If someone does, and a complaint is made, the user would be warned and the signature would be editted or removed by a mod with a message to the user.
That would be similar to how an inappropriate post by a user would be handled.
The mods already do an excellent job at handling those issues.
MacaronyMax said:
Click the link in my sig please would you say those signatures there are too big , I will happily resize them if they are , their resolution is 600*200 and btw. Moderators will ask members with over sized sigs to resize them
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, our policy is to not restrict the size of signatures, unless one of the mods finds it to be too big. At that point, we'll ask the user to trim it!
Well, I guess, another option would be a user option that allows to display or not members signatures
ChefChaudart said:
Well, I guess, another option would be a user option that allows to display or not members signatures
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You mean this? (in your usercp)
Visible Post Elements
You have the option to show or hide various elements of messages, which may be of use to users on slow internet connections, or who want to remove extraneous clutter from posts.
Show Signatures
Show Avatars
Show Images (including attached images and images in code)
[/QUOTE]Built into vBulletin long ago
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MordyT said:
You mean this? (in your usercp)
Built into vBulletin long ago
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oups
Yes What a (new) pleasure to read XDA !!!
annoying mod signatures!
Yes, these large signatures, especially by moderators with constant moving colors and images are annoying and distract from the content/purpose of each thread. It is possible to turn off signatures. Go to User CP>Edit Options>Thread display Options and you can turn them off. But in reality, mods should not be allowed to have such large annoying signatures advertising their wares.
JVH3 said:
Size of the signature is already greatly restricted by the number of characters in it.
If someone puts care into their signature, the number of characters could be much greater, but take up less screen space. Just changing the color counts as characters.
The total vertical pixels of all images in signatures could could have a limit, which would prevent the signatures that are blatantly too large.
Often times using more characters can actually reduce the total screen space taken up by the signature.
For instance posting a raw URL takes up more screen space than embedding it as something like
using { and } in place of [ and ]
{URL=the raw URL}link{/URL}
By doing this, many links can all appear on one line.
Rather than modifying the site to automatically restrict this, I think enforcement would probably be better done by making a site policy to not have obscenely large signatures.
If someone does, and a complaint is made, the user would be warned and the signature would be editted or removed by a mod with a message to the user.
That would be similar to how an inappropriate post by a user would be handled.
The mods already do an excellent job at handling those issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with your points. Would you mind reducing the size of your signature?
me even too dont like big signaturs cause problems wid loading of page wen ur net sucks :-/
If you see someone with a ridiculously large signature image, report them using the "report post" button at the top right of one of their posts

Issue with "Jump to first unread" on the subscribed threads

Hi,
I use a lot the small arrow to the left of each subscribed thread to jump to the 1st unread post.
Most of the time it works correctly, but from time to time it will show me the start of the previous page and be left at the top, since the URL anchor is not present on that page.
The original link will be something like ".../showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=nnnnnn", which later resolves to ".../showthread.php?p=mmmmmm#postmmmmmm".
The problem is that "showthread.php", when processing with the "p=..." argument, sometimes fails and presents the previous page than it should. If I were to replace "p=mmmm" by "t=nnnn&page=yyy", leaving the anchor, it will work.
Based on some experiments, my guess is that that php, when processing in the p= mode, fails to handle the edge case where post_count mod page_length is 0. I tried it with multiple page sizes, and for the case I was trying it (before I read the post and now need to wait for another case like this), the post was a multiple of 10, 20, 30 and 40 but not 50. So, only after changing the page length to all values to confirm it was failing, and finally to 50, did it work properly.
I normally use 20 posts per page so the chances of the last unread being a multiple of that are pretty slim, but those using 10/page are likely to experience this more often.
FIX: The formula for the page count "page_number=((post_count - 1) DIV page_length) + 1" or equivalent. Currently there's an offset of 1 that probably nobody ever complained about (at least I didn't find any post mentioning this).
This occurs regardless of the selected theme, and also on the XDA app (the server side is probably the same, or shares that part of the code).
EDIT: It appears that the conditions are not that simple. Sometimes, *after* the situation has been triggered (or so it seems), refresh of the subscribed threads view won't solve it immediately. Even if my next unread post is, say, the 3rd on the next page, I'll still be taken to the top of the previous page and therefore not land on the right post (correct anchor, but wrong page). Something to do with caching, perhaps?
Tungstwenty said:
Hi,
I use a lot the small arrow to the left of each subscribed thread to jump to the 1st unread post.
Most of the time it works correctly, but from time to time it will show me the start of the previous page and be left at the top, since the URL anchor is not present on that page.
The original link will be something like ".../showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=nnnnnn", which later resolves to ".../showthread.php?p=mmmmmm#postmmmmmm".
The problem is that "showthread.php", when processing with the "p=..." argument, sometimes fails and presents the previous page than it should. If I were to replace "p=mmmm" by "t=nnnn&page=yyy", leaving the anchor, it will work.
Based on some experiments, my guess is that that php, when processing in the p= mode, fails to handle the edge case where post_count mod page_length is 0. I tried it with multiple page sizes, and for the case I was trying it (before I read the post and now need to wait for another case like this), the post was a multiple of 10, 20, 30 and 40 but not 50. So, only after changing the page length to all values to confirm it was failing, and finally to 50, did it work properly.
I normally use 20 posts per page so the chances of the last unread being a multiple of that are pretty slim, but those using 10/page are likely to experience this more often.
FIX: The formula for the page count "page_number=((post_count - 1) DIV page_length) + 1" or equivalent. Currently there's an offset of 1 that probably nobody ever complained about (at least I didn't find any post mentioning this).
This occurs regardless of the selected theme, and also on the XDA app (the server side is probably the same, or shares that part of the code).
EDIT: It appears that the conditions are not that simple. Sometimes, *after* the situation has been triggered (or so it seems), refresh of the subscribed threads view won't solve it immediately. Even if my next unread post is, say, the 3rd on the next page, I'll still be taken to the top of the previous page and therefore not land on the right post (correct anchor, but wrong page). Something to do with caching, perhaps?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
I have recognized this radom issue from time to time in xda app and on my PC.
The last few times when the jump to first unread post failed (jumped to the wrong post), there was a new page in the thread.
And instead of jumping to the first post on the last page of the thread, this action jumped to the first post on the second-last page of the thread (which was the last page before the new post was added).
But I also recognized the issue, that the jump to first unread post lead me to the last post of the thread, even if I have not read one or two posts before this last post.
The strange thing is that this function works correct most of the time ... only sometimes it misbehaves.
Same problem here! Will anyone fix this?
BUMP! When will this be fixed?
kevindd992002 said:
BUMP! When will this be fixed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bump again, still not fixed and very annoying.
I'm having issues recreating this problem. We have a query that is similar to the one you said but a little bit different, also there are also factors that may be playing into consideration such as if a post was deleted and I'm wondering if that might be returning the incorrect offset. Can you give me steps to reproduce this again? Is it only threads where you have an unread post count = the number of posts per page?
bitpushr said:
Can you give me steps to reproduce this again? Is it only threads where you have an unread post count = the number of posts per page?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For me, using the 2010 interface, anytime on any thread, when I use the shortcut sent to me via an email sent by the XDA website, or use the jump to first unread button it will normally go to the top of the page of the last page I read. Then the next several times I use a shortcut to the thread it goes to that place even when more pages are used and I've read through them all. Then after several visits it will reset and go to the top of the last page I visited again.
I use 50 posts per page. And using the 2010 interface, it NEVER goes to the first unread post whether I use a shortcut from an email sent by XDA or using the button on the top of the page.
Thanks for the help.
Lately I haven't come across this issue, or at least I haven't noticed. I'm not sure if it's because the frequency I check the forum is quite lower, if something was fixed / updated on the server, if it's because I'm now using the 2013 Beta theme instead of the 2013 Beta - 1024 I used before, or something else.
I'll keep an eye out, though, and post here if I do come across this problem again with as much info I can infer from the situation.
Tungstwenty said:
Hi,
I use a lot the small arrow to the left of each subscribed thread to jump to the 1st unread post.
Most of the time it works correctly, but from time to time it will show me the start of the previous page and be left at the top, since the URL anchor is not present on that page.
The original link will be something like ".../showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=nnnnnn", which later resolves to ".../showthread.php?p=mmmmmm#postmmmmmm".
The problem is that "showthread.php", when processing with the "p=..." argument, sometimes fails and presents the previous page than it should. If I were to replace "p=mmmm" by "t=nnnn&page=yyy", leaving the anchor, it will work.
Based on some experiments, my guess is that that php, when processing in the p= mode, fails to handle the edge case where post_count mod page_length is 0. I tried it with multiple page sizes, and for the case I was trying it (before I read the post and now need to wait for another case like this), the post was a multiple of 10, 20, 30 and 40 but not 50. So, only after changing the page length to all values to confirm it was failing, and finally to 50, did it work properly.
I normally use 20 posts per page so the chances of the last unread being a multiple of that are pretty slim, but those using 10/page are likely to experience this more often.
FIX: The formula for the page count "page_number=((post_count - 1) DIV page_length) + 1" or equivalent. Currently there's an offset of 1 that probably nobody ever complained about (at least I didn't find any post mentioning this).
This occurs regardless of the selected theme, and also on the XDA app (the server side is probably the same, or shares that part of the code).
EDIT: It appears that the conditions are not that simple. Sometimes, *after* the situation has been triggered (or so it seems), refresh of the subscribed threads view won't solve it immediately. Even if my next unread post is, say, the 3rd on the next page, I'll still be taken to the top of the previous page and therefore not land on the right post (correct anchor, but wrong page). Something to do with caching, perhaps?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BUMP! When will this be fixed?

[Q] Tap triggers swipe (aka sensitive screen)

Some people over at the fairphone.com forum reported a "sensitive" screen. They try to tap on a button (or link) and instead of triggering the button the fairphone starts scrolling. My fairphone also shows this behavior and I tried to find out why. Well, after trying for some time I realized that the shorter I tap on the screen the more likely it happens in a swipe/scroll.
So I enabled the "pointer position" option within the developer tools and shot two screen shots. In the first screenshot I tap for round about 500ms whereas in the second screenshot I tried to tap as short a possible. Like you would click with mouse. It show the error pretty obvious. Any ideas how to adjust that?
Hello
I noticed exactly this behaviour on my Fairphone, too.
That's why I started a thread on the official Fairphone website 22 days ago.
I'm not allowed to post direct links here, so I can give you only the head line here:
"Hyper-sensitive-touchscreen"
And on german Fairphone Freunde forum there's also a thread about this problem
Key-Word:
"Empfindlichkeit-des-Touchscreen"
So far, there is not very much response on these threads, but it seems that not all the handsets are affected, because not all of the answers confirmed the problems. One of the guys on fairphone website sent a request to the support team, a few days ago. Maybe he can forward the answer he gets... I'll ask him in his own fairphone thread - "Sensibility-and-reboots"
Unfortunately my phone broke after just one day, so I'm waiting for a replacement now and can't really offer a solution here...
But during the few hours, my phone worked, I entered the engineering mode (by typing *#*#3646633#*#* in the standard dialler app) and there were many options to manipulate the tuochscreen.
Maybe the more experienced guys here in the forum can work out a solution to solve the problem?!
Thank you in advance!
I have the same "hypersensitive screen" issue
Before I was used to briefly and lightly tapping/touching the screen, but with my Fairphone that often gives a scroll signal.
My developer crosshair option shows short lines, the touchpanel behaves as if I first tapped a few centimers away and then a split second later it registers where I actually touched the screen.
I had to learn to firmly tap and hold, otherwise I couldn't select anything on the screen.
It seems a sofware patch for the touchpanel is needed.
-----------------------------------------------
Fairphone FP1
Caju (v.1.1)
Touchscreen settings
I am copying this from the Fairphone forum, for future reference:
My settings, as copied from engineering mode:
tpd_em_log = 0
tpd_em_log_to_fs = 0
tpd_em_sample_cnt = 16
tpd_em_auto_time_interval = 10
tpd_em_pressure_threshold = 0
tpd_em_debounce_time = 0
tpd_em_debounce_time0 = 1
tpd_em_debounce_time1 = 4
tpd_em_spl_num = 1
tpd_em_asamp = 1
NOTE: Do NOT change any of the values (in this case, under Settings). I do not know what they do, really, and how your device might react! I just report mine, for your comparison.
Just FTR, my device works fine!
Any values different from yours? Then I would suggest reporting the issue to FP while including the link to our discussion here, and on the Fairphone forum. If we can narrow down the source of the problem to be caused by some settings, and not your environment or your specific devices hardware malfunctioning, @benkxda could report this to FP in his next mail.
boondiordna said:
I am copying this from the Fairphone forum, for future reference:
My settings, as copied from engineering mode:
tpd_em_log = 0
tpd_em_log_to_fs = 0
tpd_em_sample_cnt = 16
tpd_em_auto_time_interval = 10
tpd_em_pressure_threshold = 0
tpd_em_debounce_time = 0
tpd_em_debounce_time0 = 1
tpd_em_debounce_time1 = 4
tpd_em_spl_num = 1
tpd_em_asamp = 1
NOTE: Do NOT change any of the values (in this case, under Settings). I do not know what they do, really, and how your device might react! I just report mine, for your comparison.
Just FTR, my device works fine!
Any values different from yours? Then I would suggest reporting the issue to FP while including the link to our discussion here, and on the Fairphone forum. If we can narrow down the source of the problem to be caused by some settings, and not your environment or your specific devices hardware malfunctioning, @benkxda could report this to FP in his next mail.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I already put a link on fairphone.com to this XDA thread. Thanks for telling! Well, my settings looks identical to yours. I also played around with them. I have no idea if touch screens nowadays need deboucing or sth like that. So I changed these settings a bit...without improvement though. I am also wondering what tpd_em_log is. It is put to 0. I put it to 1 hoping there is some log written somewhere....but i could not find where unfortunately.
Hey there,
I have the same problem and no solution. But here is my input on that issue. Maybe it helps Fairphone when they investigate that issue, maybe not.
hanzano said:
Well, after trying for some time I realized that the shorter I tap on the screen the more likely it happens in a swipe/scroll.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I realized the same thing. BUT in addition, I figured out that it has also something to do with how soft you touch. If I try and touch my screen very very gently, I can reconstruct that behaviour every time. If I press a bit harder, it works better.
I attached a screenshot where I did soft touches, and you see a lot of wiggeling especially in the botom row
Yesterday I was annoyed by this issue. I was a bit in a hurry and the Fairphone touchscreen did not react properly
So I just debugged in Android Studio and this is what I logged:
Code:
12:07:48.874 MotionEvent.ACTION_DOWN: 300.44363, 485.4943
12:07:48.886 MotionEvent.ACTION_MOVE: 293.13342, 499.09888
12:07:48.901 MotionEvent.ACTION_MOVE: 293.45657, 497.48178
...
12:07:49.168 MotionEvent.ACTION_MOVE: 293.45657, 497.48178
12:07:49.183 MotionEvent.ACTION_MOVE: 291.2037, 497.48178
12:07:49.198 MotionEvent.ACTION_MOVE: 290.46213, 497.48178
...
12:07:49.403 MotionEvent.ACTION_MOVE: 290.46213, 497.48178
12:07:49.406 MotionEvent.ACTION_UP: 290.46213, 497.48178
12:07:49.406 event.getDownTime: 566
I tapped for 566ms. Pretty obvious that from ACTION_DOWN to the first ACTION_MOVE there is a big delta of ~14px (is it really pixel?) in y-direction.
Hey there,
probably this does not help anyone, but just for the sake of documentation: due to my headphone-jack issue, my fairphone got replaced by a new one. Now it seems that my sensitive screen issue is gone.
I don't know about how many sources you guys have, but if you have the kernel sources, someone could try to implement a filter (and enable debugging logs in the kmsg ofc) so touches under 400ms (just a value for explanation) are only getting registered as touches, but not as movements. However, this could also have some downsides (pretty fast swipes for example), therefore a sysfs option would be a nice idea
But this would at least be a workaround.
Hyst said:
Hey there,
probably this does not help anyone, but just for the sake of documentation: due to my headphone-jack issue, my fairphone got replaced by a new one. Now it seems that my sensitive screen issue is gone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, ok.Would you mind doing another sreenshot like you did already? Just in order to see the difference.
laufersteppenwolf said:
I don't know about how many sources you guys have, but if you have the kernel sources, someone could try to implement a filter (and enable debugging logs in the kmsg ofc) so touches under 400ms (just a value for explanation) are only getting registered as touches, but not as movements. However, this could also have some downsides (pretty fast swipes for example), therefore a sysfs option would be a nice idea
But this would at least be a workaround.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is what I also had in mind. I already had a look at Xposed framework trying to find out how to "intercept" global touches. With a normal Android Service it is unfortunately not possible at least what I have read so far.
hanzano said:
That is what I also had in mind. I already had a look at Xposed framework trying to find out how to "intercept" global touches. With a normal Android Service it is unfortunately not possible at least what I have read so far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Xposed is a genious piece of work, however, this should be done via kernel.
Maybe @benkxda could have a chat with Fairphone about that?
hanzano said:
Hmm, ok.Would you mind doing another sreenshot like you did already? Just in order to see the difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no problem. Here you go!
As far as I am concerned I did the same thing. small fast touches.
although sometimes there is a long line, overall a lot less wiggeling.
Hyst said:
no problem. Here you go!
As far as I am concerned I did the same thing. small fast touches.
although sometimes there is a long line, overall a lot less wiggeling.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That looks much better than beforehand. I believe the red lines are not of interest. These just seem to be estimations. I had a look into Android source code com.android.internal.widget.PointerLocationView. The VelocityTracker has an Estimator which is drawn in light red. The MediaTek development tool seems to do it similar. So I would only count the green lines.
But I still think that this is not perfect either. I checked with my old Samsung Galaxy Ace and the Android location pointer which really gives points, no line at all when tapping shortly.
laufersteppenwolf said:
Xposed is a genious piece of work, however, this should be done via kernel.
Maybe @benkxda could have a chat with Fairphone about that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I absolutely agree with you that this should actually be done on kernel/driver level. But I have no idea about Android's kernel structure or any driver layer at all. I used the Android SDK though. And unfortunately MediaTek is not giving all sources for the FairPhone
Where exactly do you expect touches to be evaluated and "forwarded" to Android? Do you have some example code of other phones probably? I am just interested how this works in software.
hanzano said:
I absolutely agree with you that this should actually be done on kernel/driver level. But I have no idea about Android's kernel structure or any driver layer at all. I used the Android SDK though. And unfortunately MediaTek is not giving all sources for the FairPhone
Where exactly do you expect touches to be evaluated and "forwarded" to Android? Do you have some example code of other phones probably? I am just interested how this works in software.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry for the late answer, haven't seen you post
Well, kernel sources are quite easily structured, you've got the drivers, in there you find the input drivers, in which you also find the touchscreen drivers. in there are several drivers, you then need to find the correct one (in my case it's THIS file). In there are all functions to make your touchscreen work. This device also has a filter for "ghost" touches, just search for it inside this file
So, if you have located the driver of your device, you can there all needed stuff, such as the filter I mentioned
laufersteppenwolf said:
Sorry for the late answer, haven't seen you post
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No prob
laufersteppenwolf said:
Well, kernel sources are quite easily structured, you've got the drivers, in there you find the input drivers, in which you also find the touchscreen drivers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah ok, got it. In folder alps >> kernel >> drivers >> input >> touchscreen there are 68 files.
laufersteppenwolf said:
in there are several drivers, you then need to find the correct one (in my case it's THIS file).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you forget the link on "THIS" probably?
laufersteppenwolf said:
In there are all functions to make your touchscreen work. This device also has a filter for "ghost" touches, just search for it inside this file
So, if you have located the driver of your device, you can there all needed stuff, such as the filter I mentioned
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Vielen Dank! Helps a lot
hanzano said:
Did you forget the link on "THIS" probably?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ooops yeah, I did So HERE you go
Hello @Hyst
In the last week I was discussing with the support team pretty intensively about the touchscreen issue.
Now, they asked me to send them my phone, to see what happens on the device.
But, as I'm working abroad, its not that easy for me, to send it soon.
That's why I suggested, they should ask you, to get the IMEI of your old device - as you offered in the general thread.
Unfortunately Rick de Groot (the support guy) asked me again, to ask you for this number...
A little bit strange, but this is what I want to do now
Can you please send your old IMEI number and the RMA (repair form number) to this email:
<[email protected]>
That would be really great!
PS:
My Name is Florian W. if you want to quote me in your email.
Maybe this helps them to relate your email to my support request.
Thank you in advance!
Holzwurm86
Hi @Holzwurm86
sure thing. I've just send them an email.
Holzwurm86 said:
In the last week I was discussing with the support team pretty intensively about the touchscreen issue.
Now, they asked me to send them my phone, to see what happens on the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good to see that there is still progress. The list of phones being affected gets bigger at the fairphone.com forum. If the engineers from Kwamecorp or Changhong need help like debugging or logging touches I am willing to help of course.

Can't post long word. Forum will add spacebar.

Example the rom name K50a40_S112_150610_ROW_TO_K50a40_S114_150618_ROW_W CDE.zip
Forum setup long word to 50 characters.
123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890
123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890
Yep, this has always been the case, for as long as I can remember. Not sure if the limitation is vBulletin, SQL or something else?
We've encountered the same in our forum & turned out to be vBulletin bug.
@natong
It would be better if you put all those long filenames inside CODE tag.
Titokhan said:
We've encountered the same in our forum & turned out to be vBulletin bug.
@natong
It would be better if you put all those long filenames inside CODE tag.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you adjust more width and unlimit height for CODE tag ?
Currently it limit to display only 10-20 lines height with scrollbar.
@natong
Sorry, I can't help you with that. But its indeed better to get a CODE window without any horizontal scrollbar.
I known how to post long word now.
1234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890

Categories

Resources