[comp.unix.wizards] The Mythical \"X on a Dumb Terminal\" server, part 53

valdis@sun.mcs.clarkson.edu (07/17/88)

Hmm. Maybe these wizards are cleverer than I, but I've been in this business
as either a student or a professional for close to a decade now, so I'll voice
my opinion... :-)

Somebody proposed that we use a downloadable 256-char font with appropriate
pixel definitions to cover all possible bit patters.

I've USED such a beast - it's called an IBM 3270 Programmable Symbol Set.

OK. So we're using 9x11 pixmaps.  (if not 9x11, then something else equally
sized 9x13, 11x15 - argument still holds).

Hmm. 99 pixels.  That gives us
a LOT of possible pixmaps - like 2**99 (each pixel can be on or off, count
in binary - we're all wizards here, right? :-)

Somehow I don't think we're gonna get it to fit.

And of course, that's the reason the IBM solution is ugly.  If you ever see
the 'coyboy hat' demo of Sas/graph, you can SEE where they cheated a bit
and MOVED THE LINES around so they could re-use an already defined character.
They only have like 3,000 graphics slots they can download.  And they STILL
have to cheat.

The biggest thing you can fit in a 256-char font and cover all bases is
if you have a 2x4 char font.  That gives you 8 pixels that need 2**8 = 256
different pixmaps for coverage. A 3x3 loses, as that's 9 pixels and 512 
pixmaps.  OK - all you OLD TIMERS out there - has ANYBODY ever seen a terminal
that gave you a ** two by four ** character matrix?? *AND* downloadable fonts?
*AND* didn't have a video generator that forced one blank pixel between chars
and two between rows like a lot do, so you have all-points-addressable?

I'm amazed that this discussion has gone this long without a reality check.

Personally, I'll wait for an X11 port to something a bit more powerful than
a terminal - like a Mac II.  Until then, I'll use 'screen' on my TVI 950
when I call from home.

				Valdis Kletnieks
				Sr. Systems Programmer
				Clarkson University

jbs@eddie.MIT.EDU (07/17/88)

In article <16524@brl-adm.ARPA> valdis@sun.mcs.clarkson.edu writes:
>Somebody proposed that we use a downloadable 256-char font with appropriate
>pixel definitions to cover all possible bit patters.

I never proposed such a thing.  Please re-read my article.  


(back from re-reading so soon?)

Now, note that I did not say anything about a downloadable font, nor
did I say that I wanted to access every possible bit pattern.  Each
character on the terminal would be dealt with, by the server, as one
"pixel"--one that can contain some number of different values, not
that unlike a color display.  The server would not display a character
by painting it pixel-by-pixel; it would simply set one pixel to the
correct value.

(again) The goal here is not to do graphics on a character terminal.
It is to do characters on a character terminal--using a consistent,
(roughly) device-independent, network-transparent protocol: X.

Jeff Siegal

lyndon@ncc.Nexus.CA (Lyndon Nerenberg) (07/17/88)

In article <16524@brl-adm.ARPA> valdis@sun.mcs.clarkson.edu writes:
> [ ... ]  OK - all you OLD TIMERS out there - has ANYBODY ever seen a terminal
>that gave you a ** two by four ** character matrix?? *AND* downloadable fonts?
>*AND* didn't have a video generator that forced one blank pixel between chars
>and two between rows like a lot do, so you have all-points-addressable?

OLD timer, indeed! :-)

A few years back, I had the misfortune of owning a Kurzweil 4000 OCR
system. The operator console would display the text as it was recognized,
with questionable characters highlighted. You could get a graphic display
of the character as it appeared on the page via one of the function keys.

I discovered (accidently) one day that the system displayed this graphic
by mapping the raster image into a series of ASCII characters representing
the various combinations of "bitmap cells."

I don't know how many fonts this took (or what the cell size was) however
they had to have mapped the entire range of cells in, as the image was
a complete one in all respects.

The terminal was manufactured by Microterm. I don't know if Microterm
or Xerox were responsible for the modifications...

-- 
{alberta,pyramid,uunet}!ncc!lyndon  lyndon@Nexus.CA