Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!stan!marvin!toml From: toml@marvin.Solbourne.COM (Tom LaStrange) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x Subject: Re: Some Very Basic Questions Message-ID: Date: 29 May 91 11:49:29 GMT References: <1991May15.174459.16463@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <29086@hydra.gatech.EDU> <1991May24.203747.12363@smsc.sony.com> <13015@sybase.sybase.com> <1991May29.125730.17407@cs.utk.edu> Sender: toml@solbourne.com (Tom LaStrange) Organization: Solbourne Computer, Inc. Lines: 21 In-Reply-To: de5@ornl.gov's message of 29 May 91 12:57:30 GMT |> >The main difference between OpenLook and Motif is that Motif is a |> >specific implementation of a widget set and OpenLook is a |> >specification of a user interface which may be implemented by anyone, |> >not necessarily using the X11 intrinsics (Suns XView is not intrinsic |> >based). |> |> Wrong. Motif is a specification, too. OSF just happens to have an |> implementation available, but there's nothing preventing one from |> writing their own. Here we go again... Yes Motif is a specification. Unfortunately, (or fortunately, depending upon your viewpoint) part of the specification is the API which includes all the Xt'isms. So yes, you can go off and write a new toolkit that mimics motif, but you can never get it certified by OSF unless you also have the existing API. I believe there will only be one OSF certified motif toolkit. -- (I kid you not)Tom LaStrange toml@Solbourne.COM