Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!super!udel!gatech!uflorida!mailrus!purdue!i.cc.purdue.edu!h.cc.purdue.edu!s.cc.purdue.edu!ain
From: ain@s.cc.purdue.edu (Patrick White)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Structured Graphics Standard
Message-ID: <3550@s.cc.purdue.edu>
Date: 11 Sep 88 18:49:43 GMT
References: <8809090717.AA15695@cory.Berkeley.EDU>
Reply-To: ain@s.cc.purdue.edu.UUCP (Patrick White)
Organization: PUCC Land, USA
Lines: 53

In article <8809090717.AA15695@cory.Berkeley.EDU> dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes:
>:simple, relatively easy to implement (all we're missing is RoundRects
>:and arbitrary regions - ok, the latter ain't so easy) - and there's
>:400 zillion people out there using MacDraw.  The overall net response
>:was "nawww, we can do better than that."

   But just do we want to do that is better?  higher resolution?  object
oriented?  color?

>:Months later, we still don't have a standard for structured 2d graphics,
>:and there are now 525 zillion people who already use the QuickDraw standard

   There was one posted that was fairly nice, but when I tried to reply to the
author, I found his account had evaporated.. anyone know where to find:
%			Ross Cunniff
%			...{ucbvax,hplabs}!hpda!cunniff
%			cunniff%hpda@hplabs.ARPA

>	I wish there were 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).

   Line and points alone are not the best thing we can do though, although you
can do anything most devices can do, the programs end up driving essencially
a virtual dumb device rather than driving a virtual (or real) intelligent
graphics engine -- I'd rather write code for an intelligent graphics engine.

>	For instance, some applications will want to store the points
>as real numbrs (pick a format!), or as integers... but how big an integer?

   As big as you can handle efficiently -- can always throw away part of it
if you don't need it all, but it will be much harder to expand to more bits
after the initial design.

>Are coordinates stored relative to local origins for objects?

   Objects are pretty useless if they don't reside in their own individual
coordinate space since you can't transform them easily otherwise (or use them
more than once).

>What kind of objects should be supported?

   Lines, points, rectangles (squares?), ellipses (circles?), different fonts,
area fills, perhaps clipping rectangles and windows, ability to build more
complex objects from less complex ones... in general, all the "built-in"
capabilities of the Amiga and more?

   How about color?  Want to be able to support only the Amiga's capabilities,
or do we want to do more and hope it catches on or the Amiga becomes more
sophisticated in that respect?

Pat White  (ain@s.cc.purdue.edu)