Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-eddie.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!barmar
From: barmar@mit-eddie.UUCP (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: net.graphics
Subject: Re: GKS vs. 1979 SIGGRAPH CORE
Message-ID: <1545@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 4-Apr-84 23:44:54 EST
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.1545
Posted: Wed Apr  4 23:44:54 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 7-Apr-84 02:13:58 EST
References: <1412@sunybcs.UUCP>
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 18

GKS and CORE have much in common, have been around for about the same
amount of time, and both of them contributed to the design of the draft
standard GKS.  They had to pick one to be the major base; I'm not sure
why you are so miffed that they picked GKS (or am I misreading your
tone?).  It just happened not to be the one you use, and there was a
fifty percent chance you would lose; if you had won, then a bunch of
existing GKS users would be voicing your complaint.

GKS is device-independent, just like Core.  It should not be difficult
to convert Core applications to run under GKS.  They probably have about
the same set of primitive operations.  Names, calling sequences, and
constants will be different, but the organization of the applications
will probably not have to change; most of the translations will be
pretty mechanical.
-- 
			Barry Margolin
			ARPA: barmar@MIT-Multics
			UUCP: ..!genrad!mit-eddie!barmar