Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC840302); site boring.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!gatech!ut-sally!seismo!mcvax!boring!jack
From: jack@boring.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Windows and standards.
Message-ID: <6701@boring.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 7-Dec-85 20:24:30 EST
Article-I.D.: boring.6701
Posted: Sat Dec  7 20:24:30 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 9-Dec-85 03:57:16 EST
References: <314@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Reply-To: jack@boring.UUCP (Jack Jansen)
Organization: AMOEBA project, CWI, Amsterdam
Lines: 22
Apparently-To: rnews@mcvax.LOCAL


I'm afraid it's just a little early for standardising I/O
for bitmap displays.

Every new workstation coming out has a few more neat ideas
that previous designers didn't think of (and, on the other
hand, ommitted a few things that others *did* think of).

Now, what should we choose as a standard?
The highest-level one thinkable? That will probably see us revising
the standard every year or so, as people come up with new neat ideas.
A low-level one? So that I can't use all that truly great stuff
that my machine implements?

Please note that I *love* standards (well, reasonable ones...),
I only think we'll have to struggle on a few more years, so that
we'll be able to come up with a nice and versatile standard, in
stead of being tied down to an outdated standard for umpty years.
Remember COBOL? FTN? X-25?
-- 
	Jack Jansen, jack@mcvax.UUCP
	The shell is my oyster.