We were just rejected for our submission on the Nook HD/HD+ due to “user interface of your app is not appropriately scaled”.
Since we use our own content scaling, we need to be able to detect that the device is a Nook, Nook HD, or Nook HD+.
None of the Documentation for system.getInfo() has been updated with anything useful for detecting this. We need to have this information in order to accommodate our content scaling. [import]uid: 120686 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 331650[/import]
[import]uid: 40413 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126410[/import]
Edit: Urrm, @PGKen, I suppose your issue actually is different from what I thought. You might want to look into fetching the display.contentWidth and display. contentHeight at runtime and based on what it returns, choose appropriate art asset to display?
Naomi
@PGKen, I just posted an email message from B&N about using daily build 927 here:
I imagine B&N and Corona Labs tested this thing before the mail went out, so maybe you would want to try using 927? (I haven’t done it yet, but I thought it won’t to hurt to mention this…)
Naomi [import]uid: 67217 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126415[/import]
Naomi,
We do use the content width and height to do our scaling.
I take the texture width/height and multiply by a scale x and y factor. Those are generated by taking the display.contentWidth and display.contentHeight and dividing our source art display size.
this gives you something like the following:
[lua]SRC_ART_WIDTH = 1024
SRC_ART_HEIGHT = 768
scaleX = display.contentWidth / SRC_ART_WIDTH
scaleY = display.contentHeight / SRC_ART_HEIGHT[/lua]
Then when you load a asset that was made for a particular src resolution you can just set the image.scaleX and image.scaleY to the scaleX and scaleY values.
We handle small res devices similarly using source art that was made for a 480x320 display.
Basically, we are manually doing what the dynamic content scaling does for you; with the exception that we can do some tricks you cannot do with dynamic content scaling.
So as long as Corona returns the correct values for display.contentWidth and display.contentHeight everything should just work. [import]uid: 120686 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126438[/import]
Hey, @PGKen, I haven’t started working on Nook HD/HD+ version yet, but am I hearing that Nook HD/HD+ do not return proper display.contentWidth and display.contentHeight at runtime, and that’s why it’s causing you this issue?
Naomi [import]uid: 67217 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126467[/import]
Naomi,
It’s hard to know what the problem is. They just rejected it because it doesn’t meet their UI standards. Since no one has a Nook HD yet to test on, I cannot say if it is the display content Width, Height that is the problem; that’s just my guess based on their reason for the rejection. [import]uid: 120686 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126468[/import]
@PGKen, I wonder if yours would be approved if you build it using daily build 927 or higher. As I mentioned in the link noted above in post #2, I did receive an email from B&N yesterday, suggesting that I use daily build 927 or higher, test and resubmit.
Naomi [import]uid: 67217 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126524[/import]
Naomi,
We received a similar email, but it said 925 or higher just like Walter’s Blog post.
However, I went ahead last night and submitted a new build using Corona 927. We shall see what happens.
It is a bit of a disappointment that the “transparency” we were promised from Corona regarding daily builds, etc. hasn’t happened. If you look at the daily build notes for 926 and 927 you see VERY opaque notes like “Maintenance”. If they fixed something to do with the Nook HD, they should say that in the build notes so people know to update to the latest. [import]uid: 120686 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126528[/import]
Hey, @PGKen, I’ll keep my fingers crossed for you. Let me know how it goes with your submission.
Naomi [import]uid: 67217 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126537[/import]
Hey, I do have a tiny bit of good news; my app “Le Petit Champignon” appears to have passed HD testing after I had initially failed due to this same error (content didn’t scale nicely) - I rebuilt it with 926. This is a simple ebook, with a very lightweight use of storyboard, and it seems to have been approved for the HD and HD+. My other app failed horribly with all kinds of UI issues, so I will look at that, but at least…something did go through!
good luck, everyone! And by the way, is anyone selling their used Nook? I am going to have to start setting up my indie QA lab… [import]uid: 81642 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126545[/import]
So, I finally got some useful info back from Nook.
The issue is in using LETTERBOX in the config.lua. Apparently they no longer allow you to use letterbox, even though our apps have been out on the Nook for 6 months using that mode.
IF I knew it was a Nook device I could change my build.settings with an if/else statement, but since no one at Corona has answered my questions about the system.getInfo(“model”) return values for Nook devices, I cannot really do that.
I’ll just remove letterbox entirely from my config.lua, but this is not an ideal solution as scaling to fit the entire screen looks really bad on some other Android devices.
So, bottom line: do NOT use LETTERBOX mode in your config.lua file for Nook submission [import]uid: 120686 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126585[/import]
[import]uid: 40413 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126410[/import]
Edit: Urrm, @PGKen, I suppose your issue actually is different from what I thought. You might want to look into fetching the display.contentWidth and display. contentHeight at runtime and based on what it returns, choose appropriate art asset to display?
Naomi
@PGKen, I just posted an email message from B&N about using daily build 927 here:
I imagine B&N and Corona Labs tested this thing before the mail went out, so maybe you would want to try using 927? (I haven’t done it yet, but I thought it won’t to hurt to mention this…)
Naomi [import]uid: 67217 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126415[/import]
Naomi,
We do use the content width and height to do our scaling.
I take the texture width/height and multiply by a scale x and y factor. Those are generated by taking the display.contentWidth and display.contentHeight and dividing our source art display size.
this gives you something like the following:
[lua]SRC_ART_WIDTH = 1024
SRC_ART_HEIGHT = 768
scaleX = display.contentWidth / SRC_ART_WIDTH
scaleY = display.contentHeight / SRC_ART_HEIGHT[/lua]
Then when you load a asset that was made for a particular src resolution you can just set the image.scaleX and image.scaleY to the scaleX and scaleY values.
We handle small res devices similarly using source art that was made for a 480x320 display.
Basically, we are manually doing what the dynamic content scaling does for you; with the exception that we can do some tricks you cannot do with dynamic content scaling.
So as long as Corona returns the correct values for display.contentWidth and display.contentHeight everything should just work. [import]uid: 120686 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126438[/import]
Hey, @PGKen, I haven’t started working on Nook HD/HD+ version yet, but am I hearing that Nook HD/HD+ do not return proper display.contentWidth and display.contentHeight at runtime, and that’s why it’s causing you this issue?
Naomi [import]uid: 67217 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126467[/import]
Naomi,
It’s hard to know what the problem is. They just rejected it because it doesn’t meet their UI standards. Since no one has a Nook HD yet to test on, I cannot say if it is the display content Width, Height that is the problem; that’s just my guess based on their reason for the rejection. [import]uid: 120686 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126468[/import]
@PGKen, I wonder if yours would be approved if you build it using daily build 927 or higher. As I mentioned in the link noted above in post #2, I did receive an email from B&N yesterday, suggesting that I use daily build 927 or higher, test and resubmit.
Naomi [import]uid: 67217 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126524[/import]
Naomi,
We received a similar email, but it said 925 or higher just like Walter’s Blog post.
However, I went ahead last night and submitted a new build using Corona 927. We shall see what happens.
It is a bit of a disappointment that the “transparency” we were promised from Corona regarding daily builds, etc. hasn’t happened. If you look at the daily build notes for 926 and 927 you see VERY opaque notes like “Maintenance”. If they fixed something to do with the Nook HD, they should say that in the build notes so people know to update to the latest. [import]uid: 120686 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126528[/import]
Hey, @PGKen, I’ll keep my fingers crossed for you. Let me know how it goes with your submission.
Naomi [import]uid: 67217 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126537[/import]
Hey, I do have a tiny bit of good news; my app “Le Petit Champignon” appears to have passed HD testing after I had initially failed due to this same error (content didn’t scale nicely) - I rebuilt it with 926. This is a simple ebook, with a very lightweight use of storyboard, and it seems to have been approved for the HD and HD+. My other app failed horribly with all kinds of UI issues, so I will look at that, but at least…something did go through!
good luck, everyone! And by the way, is anyone selling their used Nook? I am going to have to start setting up my indie QA lab… [import]uid: 81642 topic_id: 31650 reply_id: 126545[/import]