Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!rpi!uupsi!sunic!dkuug!iesd!iesd.auc.dk!amanda
From: amanda@iesd.auc.dk (Per Abrahamsen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
Subject: Re: XView, OLIT, or ...?
Message-ID: <AMANDA.91Jan23152730@hilbert.iesd.auc.dk>
Date: 23 Jan 91 15:27:30 GMT
References: <FISCHER.91Jan17154543@thiele.iesd.auc.dk> <jac.664331790@sundance>
	<AMANDA.91Jan20211855@ra.iesd.auc.dk> <6412@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>
Sender: news@iesd.auc.dk (UseNet News)
Followup-To: comp.windows.open-look
Organization: Games Research, University of Aalborg, Denmark
Lines: 15
In-reply-to: jcb@frisbee.Eng.Sun.COM's message of 22 Jan 91 22:20:41 GMT


Followups directed to comp.windows.open-look.

>>>>> On 22 Jan 91 22:20:41 GMT, jcb@frisbee.Eng.Sun.COM (Jim Becker) said:

Jim> OPEN LOOK is the user interface design, not the  implementation.  OLIT
Jim> (formerly XT+) and XView are implementations of OL.

Yes, that is the answer one gets from Sun, and it makes the
distinction between the UI and the toolkit clear.  However, AT&T
insist on calling both the UI and the toolkit for OPEN LOOK in their
press releases, and does not mention OLIT.

While the "formerly XT+" toolkit may be a joint effort between Sun and
AT&T, they seem unable to agree on the name.