Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!snorkelwacker!paperboy!osf.org!dbrooks From: dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x.motif Subject: Re: what's in 1.0 -> 1.1 Message-ID: <1990Oct4.130437@osf.org> Date: 4 Oct 90 17:04:37 GMT References: Sender: news@OSF.ORG Reply-To: dbrooks@osf.org (David Brooks) Distribution: comp Organization: Open Software Foundation Lines: 42 In article , spot@CS.CMU.EDU (Scott Draves) writes: |> Can anyone summerize the differences between Motif 1.0 and 1.1? Am I |> wasting my time writing for 1.0? And in article , tjhorton@ai.toronto.edu (Timothy J. Horton) writes: |> Can anyone summarize the differences/purpose inherent in Motif 1.0.A ?? |> Was 1.0.A a bug fix, or was it intended to give 1.0 developers an upward |> compatible path to Motif 1.1 ?? The main reason for 1.0.A was to introduce the "widget meta-language", which removes knowledge of the toolkit repertoire from the internals of uil. Essentially, it uses tables to build a customized UIL. Before that, UIL only knew about vanilla Motif. There were also important bugfixes here and in 1.0.2 and 1.0.3. You could look at 1.0.A as a step on a compatibility path, but at the application interface level there really haven't been any quantum leaps. Switching to 1.1, there is almost complete campatibility from 1.0.x. Some resource names changed at 1.0.A, and some convenience routines changed at 1.1 (they weren't in the Application Environment Specification before). The significant additions to 1.1 are: - base is now the STANDARD X11R4 Intrinsics - full-blown keyboard traversal is implemented - the window manager handles multiple screens - moving towards full internationalization but there are lots of others. No, you aren't wasting your time: it's compatible with 1.0 except for the routines names I referred to, and a few other minor things outlines in the Release Notes. -- David Brooks dbrooks@osf.org Systems Engineering, OSF uunet!osf.org!dbrooks "A Loaf of Bread, a Jug of Wine, and Six Spades Redoubled" -- Omar somebody.