Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!umich!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ncar!asuvax!hrc!xroads!beagle!xr4! 0 vax!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!bionet!agate!shelby!neon!neon!ramani From: ramani@modesty.X@@3ford.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.X@@3ford.EDU (USENET News System) Organization: X@@3ford University "!@0rtment of C&)( 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; T4 9> laser printers aren't that -9@Nyet.) 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. 6%K!ld rank this as one of the most important possible >> features for X11R5. > Please, Consortium...if you do decide to KI Ade 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 ]hey 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 -9@Nthat 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 devo%77to rendering text. As has been suggeS(!B 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 8;<8entation 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 PichumaniLDAN Tel: (415) 723-2902 or 723-2437 "!@0rtment of Compute( 14ienceLDAN Fax: (415) 725-7411 Margaret Jacks Hall, Room 308 email: ramani@patience.stanford.edu X@@3ford, CA 94305 USA 7)S%!patience.stanford.edu!ramani #! rnews 892 Path: xr4ads!as (" Is.utexas.