Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uwm.edu!bionet!hayes.ims.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: nelson%odin.corp.sgi.com@sgi.com (Nelson Bolyard)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Prodigy Communications Protocol
Message-ID: <14869@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 20 Nov 90 20:01:31 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA
Lines: 20
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 837, Message 6 of 9


In article <14775@accuvax.nwu.edu> rsm@math.arizona.edu (Robert S.
Maier) enquired about the protocol used by Prodigy.  I'm not a Prodigy
subscriber, but used to work as an engineer in the videotext market.
I had an AT&T videotext terminal that was similar to Prodigy in
drawing speed, and the way it drew pictures.

Videotext in the USA was based on NAPLPS (pronounced nap-lips) the
North American Presentation Language Protocol Syntax.  'Twouldn't
surprise me a bit to see that AT&T revived that technology for
Prodigy.  Prodigy strikes me as the ultimate resurrection of videotext
in the USA.

Maybe TELECOM Digest's readers include someone who still has a copy of
the NAPLPS standard and who could take a peek at a Prodigy data stream
to see if it looks familiar.


Nelson Bolyard      nelson@sgi.COM      {decwrl,sun}!sgi!whizzer!nelson
Disclaimer: Views expressed herein do not represent the views of my employer.