Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!bu.edu!cvbnet!dopey!tgross
From: tgross@dopey.prime.com (Tom Gross)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: CGM HLHSR in SunPHIGS
Keywords: P.H.I.G.S., Chewing Gum
Message-ID: <1552@cvbnetPrime.COM>
Date: 3 Jun 91 21:43:02 GMT
References: <1991May27.185153.29565@dsd.es.com> <1529@cvbnetPrime.COM> <1991May28.194621.13640@dsd.es.com> <1534@cvbnetPrime.COM> <1991May30.203935.6298@Stardent.COM>
Sender: postnews@cvbnetPrime.COM
Reply-To: tgross@bingo.cvbnet.com (Tom Gross)
Organization: Prime Computer Inc., Bedford, MA
Lines: 51


>> 	So you're saying that CGM files discharged from PHIGS
>> 	Metafile-Out Workstations should already have hidden lines
>>	and surfaces removed? 
>>
>> 	Can we get a ruling on this from the judges?
>
>Thomas, my dear boy, you should know that to get an official
>clarification on a PHIGS issue one must submit the appropriate forms in
>triplicate...  (It's so much more fun to make fun of them than to help
>them :-)
>

	Careful Jan, don't say anything that might offend the members of
	the Phigs committee; one certainly can't make a career out of 
	adjudicating Phigs issues in email without staying on their good 
	side.  Personally, I would prefer to see these questions debated in 
	comp.graphics, but...

>One of the responsibilities on the PHIGS committee is to clarify things
>like this.  I'm not sure how one submits things to the official ruling
>queue...
>
	
	Well for God's sake hurry up and FIND OUT!  And while your at it, 
	where can I get copies of the Ansi Phigs spec?  And what does Pex 
	stand for anyway? (Is it "PHIGS extension to X" or "Phigs Extension
	to X-windows"?)  Come to think of it, shouldn't it be spelled
	P.H.I.G.S.?  Like, you know, the "Man from U.N.C.L.E."?

>While I usually agree with Rich, on this my urge to generalize and
>simplify would tend to ignore the differences in metafile output
>workstations.  So, yes, if the Metafile-Out Workstation does support
>HLHSR, which you can inquire with pinq_hlhsr_mode_facs().
>
>That can return error 62, "this information is not available for this
>MO workstation type".  It specifically does not say category, so some
>MO workstation types will and some will not.

	That's what I love about P.H.I.G.S.: an implementation can do 
	anything it wants and still be compliant with the S.T.A.N.D.A.R.D.
	It certainly paves the way for wide acceptance by hardware vendors. 
	It's a good thing for them that usability was not one of the criteria 
	used in the design of P.H.I.G.S.

>But, Thomas, if you don't know how do expect anyone else, too?

	Of course I have an "informed opinion", but these matters 
	I prefer to leave to the "experts".

/tom