Is there necessarily any risk or self-imposed limitation in having a Claim 1 statement like this –
A method for [fill in details here] on a computing device controlled by touchscreen input, and ...
– if there will also be a dependent claim that covers other means of controlling the computing device, such as by a moving cursor?
The tentative reasoning is:
- The invention actually is primarily for touchscreen devices, but would also be applicable in other environments;
- Based on prior art cited in an earlier rejection, it seems I may have to narrow it in this way, but I am not sure.