Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!ucsd!ucbvax!agate!shelby!neon!neon!ramani From: ramani@modesty.Stanford.EDU (Ramani Pichumani) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x Subject: Re: what's most important to you for R5? Message-ID: Date: 5 Jul 90 17:28:33 GMT References: <9006300548.AA00463@shamash.McRCIM.McGill.EDU> Sender: news@Neon.Stanford.EDU (USENET News System) Organization: Stanford University Department of Computer Science Lines: 57 In-Reply-To: mouse@SHAMASH.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU's message of 30 Jun 90 05:48:24 GMT mouse@SHAMASH.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU (der Mouse) writes: >> The reason for incorporating something like Display PostScript into X >> is to remove any dependence on the display resolution. > And it would do that tolerably well. But I argue that this is not > something you want to do. Not until we have displays whose pixels are > too small to see. (Current displays don't begin to approach this; even > laser printers aren't that good yet.) Perhaps you haven't used the NEXT Machine? The characters on that machine seem to be at least as good as any I've seen on any monochrome monitor. >> The usefulness of a real PostScript Interpreter cannot be >> overstated. I would rank this as one of the most important possible >> features for X11R5. > Please, Consortium...if you do decide to include this, make it > configurable out. I have no use for such a thing and have much better > uses for the memory it would eat up. (Making it an extension, like the > SHAPE extension in R4, would be a very sane way to go.) A feature doesn't have to be in the X Server to be a part of X11. It can either be part of the server or it can just be in the mit/{clients,...} hierarchy (or partly in both). Programs that are under contrib/{clients,...} are not really part of X but they do work on some machines, under some platforms, under some versions of X11... The difference between being part of mit/... versus contrib/... is that the former is essentially a standard X utility whereas the latter is not. That means you don't have to worry about whether or not the user has this function/feature. Chances are very good that they have it. So if you've got it, use it. Not to belabor the point about PostScript fonts, but one should realize that there is already a sizable amount of code and memory in the X server and Xlib devoted to rendering text. As has been suggested by several people in earlier postings, employing Adobesque font techniques at the Server/Xlib level and a PostScript Interpreter at the mit/client level would allow for a very powerful and sensible implementation of Display PostScript. Applications that don't need the interpreter can still leverage off of the generalized, device-independent font mechanism since they need some sort of text capabilities anyway. After all, isn't the goal of a device/machine/OS independent graphical windowing system the entire raison d'etre behind X? Ramani -- Ramani Pichumani Tel: (415) 723-2902 or 723-2437 Department of Computer Science Fax: (415) 725-7411 Margaret Jacks Hall, Room 308 email: ramani@patience.stanford.edu Stanford, CA 94305 USA uunet!patience.stanford.edu!ramani