Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!enea!kth!draken!liuida!isy!ingemar
From: ingemar@isy.liu.se (Ingemar Ragnemalm)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: Comp.Image.Processing (not how but WHY?)
Message-ID: <1988Dec19.141246.3075@isy.liu.se>
Date: 19 Dec 88 13:12:46 GMT
References: <172@vmsa.technion.ac.il> <589@wasatch.UUCP>
Reply-To: ingemar@carola.UUCP ()
Organization: Dept of EE, University of Linkoping
Lines: 32

In article <589@wasatch.UUCP> hansen%grizzly.utah.edu.UUCP@wasatch.UUCP (Chuck Hansen) writes:
>In article <172@vmsa.technion.ac.il> ners001@vmsa.technion.ac.il writes:
>>(for short: the people want comp.ip
>
>...  There already exists such a group, it's comp.ai.vision...
>Chuck Hansen
>hansen@cs.utah.edu

Here's another one who can't keep his big mouth shut (that's me, that is):

Computer Grapghics, Image Processing, Computer Vision and AI are different,
related subjects. People like me, who are mainly interested in IP and CV,
find very little of interest in comp.graphics or comp.ai(.vision).

I'd define the subjects like this (after a text by G.Borgefors):

Computer Graphics:   Concepts      -> Image
Image processing:    Image         -> Image
Computer Vision:     Image         -> Concepts
AI vision:           Image+Concepts-> Concepts (low to high level) (?)

That makes at least 3 different categories. We might not need a comp.vision
group, though I think it would be more popular than comp.ai.vision since
it wouldn't scare non-AI people away, but the need for comp.ip is more
apparent. Image reconstruction is not graphics, and it is not AI.
So where should such things be posted? Or are there no such postings?

/Ingemar
-- 
Dept. of Electrical Engineering	     ...!uunet!mcvax!enea!rainier!ingemar
                  ..
University of Linkoping, Sweden	     ingemar@isy.liu.se