-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
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
Devices with a landscape default orientation #19
Comments
According to flutter documentation you mentioned, the default orientation has nothing to do with aspect ratio. |
@JSUYA Please understand the definition of the words "portrait" and "landscape" and read the documentation again. Also please refer to https://api.flutter.dev/flutter/widgets/MediaQueryData/orientation.html. |
Application can resize size . If we run a 400x300 flutter application(platformview or multi windows...) on a screen with a longer height (mobile, portrait), the app will recognize landscape as default. Are you intending this?
This is the device's screen size. |
Basically yes. Only the current width and height matter. On Tizen, there's no predefined constant like Android's
Hmm.. I provided the link because it explains that "landscape" indicates "width > height" by definition. The FYI) |
https://api.flutter.dev/flutter/services/DeviceOrientation.html
According to the Flutter official documentation, the default orientation of a device is defined as the orientation in which its boot logo is displayed upright. In other words, the default orientation of most TV devices (and some common devices) is technically
landscapeLeft
, but we're currently assuming that the default orientation of a device is alwaysportraitUp
regardless of the actual screen size.A correct implementation will be like this: swift-kim@4bf08c8
However, applying this change will break some (cross-platform) apps and packages which are developed only for mobile and always assume
portraitUp
as a default orientation (example: youtube_player_iframe). How should we deal with this problem? Should we apply the patch anyway?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: