Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!rutgers!netnews.upenn.edu!eniac.seas.upenn.edu!ranjit
From: ranjit@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Ranjit Bhatnagar)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Structured Graphics Standard
Message-ID: <5096@netnews.upenn.edu>
Date: 10 Sep 88 05:07:17 GMT
References: <8809090717.AA15695@cory.Berkeley.EDU>
Sender: news@netnews.upenn.edu
Reply-To: ranjit@eniac.seas.upenn.edu.UUCP (Ranjit Bhatnagar)
Organization: University of Pennsylvania
Lines: 48

In article <8809090717.AA15695@cory.Berkeley.EDU> dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes:
>	I wish there were [a structured graphics standard]
>too, but there isn't any single format that
>is suitable for the job.  There are a thousand data structures and a 
>thousand storage formats for lines alone, and each is well suited to 
>a given range of applications (in terms of efficiency).

My feeling is that QuickDraw is good for a lot of things, and it would
be nice to use it RIGHT NOW while waiting for the more general or more
interesting standards to arrive.  QuickDraw (from my experience) fills
just about all the needs for business graphics (charts & graphs), 
posters (text + borders and bitmap pictures), line illustrations, and
such.  I have also used it for simple electronic diagrams, illustrating
experiment records for physics labs (pictures of the equipment, etc.),
and making logos for stationery.  (Of course, I should reiterate that
the main advantage of a simple standard like this over bitmaps like
you get out of DPaint or DigiPaint is that the resulting images can
be rendered at any resolution, so look killer on a laser printer.  Oh,
and, being structured, you can manipulate pieces without having to
worry about erasing and redrawing stuff.)
>
>	For instance, some applications will want to store the points
>as real numbrs (pick a format!), or as integers... but how big an integer?
>Several applications need 32 bits / value, others need only 16.  Others
>even less!  What kind of data structure?  Quad Tree?  Simple List?  Are
>coordinates stored relative to local origins for objects?  What kind of
>objects should be supported?  etc...

Answer to all these is - do it the way Apple did it.  They obviously
put a lot of thought into QuickDraw, and it's pretty nice.  

I'd better say this loud - [turn volume up one notch]:

I'm not suggesting that QuickDraw is a good all-purpose standard, nor
that settling on QuickDraw as a standard should preclude the further
development of more complex, specialized standards for drafting, 
pc-board layout, etc.  Simply that it's a useful standard for a lot
of things, and the fact that it's compatible with a zillion macintoshes
doesn't hurt.

[volume down again]

Thanks for your opinions...

	-ranjit


"Trespassers w"   ranjit@eniac.seas.upenn.edu	ucbvax!rutgers!super!eniac!...