craig@dcl-cs.UUCP (Craig Wylie) (12/06/85)
In article <314@brl-tgr.ARPA> WEBBER@red.rutgers.edu (Bob Webber) writes: >actually how to accomplish this is the issue that is addressed by most >graphics standards. using a standard like GKS will go a long ways >toward solving this problem, ....... I think I heard that there was a (proposed) standard for graphics, incorporating window management, along the lines of GKS. Anybody heard any more on this ? Craig. -- UUCP: ...!seismo!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!craig| Post: University of Lancaster, DARPA: craig%lancs.comp@ucl-cs | Department of Computing, JANET: craig@uk.ac.lancs.comp | Bailrigg, Lancaster, UK. Phone: +44 524 65201 Ext. 4146 | LA1 4YR Project: Cosmos Distributed Operating Systems Research
jack@boring.UUCP (12/08/85)
I'm afraid it's just a little early for standardising I/O for bitmap displays. Every new workstation coming out has a few more neat ideas that previous designers didn't think of (and, on the other hand, ommitted a few things that others *did* think of). Now, what should we choose as a standard? The highest-level one thinkable? That will probably see us revising the standard every year or so, as people come up with new neat ideas. A low-level one? So that I can't use all that truly great stuff that my machine implements? Please note that I *love* standards (well, reasonable ones...), I only think we'll have to struggle on a few more years, so that we'll be able to come up with a nice and versatile standard, in stead of being tied down to an outdated standard for umpty years. Remember COBOL? FTN? X-25? -- Jack Jansen, jack@mcvax.UUCP The shell is my oyster.
darylm@hammer.UUCP (Daryl McDaniel) (12/10/85)
> > I'm afraid it's just a little early for standardising I/O > for bitmap displays. > > Now, what should we choose as a standard? > The highest-level one thinkable? ... > A low-level one? So that I can't use all that truly great stuff > that my machine implements? > > -- > Jack Jansen, jack@mcvax.UUCP > The shell is my oyster. There already exists a standard for talking to graphics displays, whether bitmap or vector. This standard is embodied in the GSX and VDI "machine-independant" packages (I don't know exactly what the standard is called) available from several companies including a company localy called "GSS, or Graphics Software Systems". These packages and the standard upon which they are based define many higher level functions which may be done in the most efficient manner for your hardware. For the case where ones hardware supports a function which GSX doesn't address, there is a function which allows a command to be given directly to the hardware. I have written several programs using GSX and VDI and have had very little difficulty producing single versions of the programs which run on: IBM-PC,XT,AT Zenith Z100,Z150 HP-150 TI-Professional ATT-6300 Burroughs B25 Tek 6200 VAX Daryl V. McDaniel GWD, Sustaining Engineering tektronix!hammer!darylm Tektronix, Inc. (503) 685-2298 The above views are my own and may or may not bear any resembelance to any policy or view of Tektronix or any one else in the real world.