Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ukma!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: Hypercard
Message-ID: <7032@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: 11 Jan 88 08:48:03 GMT
References: <8801091908.aa23127@SMOKE.BRL.ARPA>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 27

In article <8801091908.aa23127@SMOKE.BRL.ARPA> CS656@OUACCVMB.BITNET writes:
>Would Hypercard be considered more of an Operating system, programming
>language, or both/neither.

It's hard to categorize, since it's unique.  It forms an environment
for both the end-user and the stack developer, but the two "hats" are
blurred since anyone can tweak a non-password protected stack to
better fit their own goals.  I suppose one wouldn't go too far wrong
in labeling it a "graphically-interfaced data management system with
embedded programming language" (the language is HyperTalk).  If you
know about Ted Nelson's "hypertext" ideas, they formed part of the
inspiration for HyperCard, especially its information linking
facilities.

>Is stackware written by Hypercard or for it with Assembly, C, etc?

HyperCard can be switched into an authoring/scripting mode that is
used to create or modify stacks (as opposed to a reading/browsing
mode).  The graphical interface takes care of much of the work,
although for really fancy stuff one ends up providing some
instructions in HyperTalk language.

>That is, would it be as unique if it was running on a IIGS?

HyperCard's uniqueness lies in its concepts, not the Mac as such.
The IIGS desktop environment (toolkit ROM) should provide most of
what the Mac contributes to HyperCard.