[comp.graphics] Re^2: Create Comp.graphics.subgroups please???

garnett@a.cs.okstate.edu (John Garnett) (01/17/90)

In article <12964@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> markv@gauss.Princeton.EDU (Mark VandeWettering) writes:
>In article <8606@pixar.UUCP> thaw@pixar.UUCP (Tom Williams) writes:
>>>I do not know the exact procedure for this but could we
>>>divide up the comp.graphics newsgroups into perhaps...
>
>comp.graphics.formats is an excellent idea, to file the plethora of postings
>about transferring images between different formats.
>
>I don't know if comp.graphics.2d and comp.graphics.3d are as good of an 
>idea, the breaking out of the two seems slightly wierd.

I agree.  However, I am interested in hearing the reasoning behind
the original idea.

>How 'bout the formation of a sources group?  comp.sources.graphics?  Any
>body believe that would be useful.

I think this is an idea whose time has come.  This would provide a
place for the growing number of packages that peform image rendering, 
manipulation, etc. (the packages named in the FAQ automated posting
would provide more than enough source to start the ball rolling).

>
>I would also like to see a comp.graphics.research group as well, that
>emphasized more esoteric and research applications.
>

Again, this sounds good to me.

So far, the compiled list of proposed and seconded groups appears to be:

comp.graphics.formats (GIF, Targa, etc, and conversions between...)
comp.graphics.research (discussion on current graphics research)
comp.graphics.requests ("send me this" or "wouldn't somebody like to
 write one of these")

Others that have been mentioned:

comp.graphics.imaging  (not sure of the intended contents here)
comp.graphics.2d (not much info on the intention here)
comp.graphics.3d (")

Groups that I would like to suggest:

comp.graphics.hardware (workstations, displays, scanners, printers, etc.)

comp.graphics.gui (graphical user-interfaces, some overlappage here with
the X-Windows group)

comp.graphics.modelling (discussion on modellers and modelling methods)

comp.graphics.rendering (discussion on renderers and algorithms)

comp.graphics.art (doesn't appear to be much demand here but who knows what
  the creation of a group would do to change that?)

comp.graphics.animation

comp.graphics.models (contributed input files for the various pd and/or
commerical renderers in existance).

There comes a point when one sees oneself going overboard.  I think I'll
stop here.  However, there isn't any harm in putting ideas on the table.

Let the discussion continue.

Oh, yes.  Let us not forget the ongoing debate over posting images
(someone else can tackle this one).  

John Garnett

-- 
John Garnett                           Computing and Information Sciences
                                       Oklahoma State University
Email: garnett@a.cs.okstate.edu        Stillwater, Oklahoma