Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-ncis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!purdue!bouma From: bouma@cs.purdue.EDU (William J. Bouma) Newsgroups: comp.graphics Subject: Re: the word "bitmap" Summary: language is a virus Message-ID: <5785@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> Date: 6 Jan 89 22:07:37 GMT References: <8568@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <375@avsd.UUCP> <23448@apple.Apple.COM> Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University Lines: 28 bitmap 1 bit map 8 bit map 24 bit map bytemap 3 byte map wordmap Everyone knows that a "bit" is one binary digit. Most people are sure a "byte" is eight binary digits. Nobody knows how big a "word" is. Assume you need a word to mean a list of binary digits which represent a picture when shoved into the screen memory of some machine, n-bits per memory word. What is the clearest and most logical way to describe this bunch of data? "n-bitmap". "Bytemap" is certainly no more correct than "bitmap" and will add a layer of confusion as to the size for some people. When I say "bitmap", you understand me, no? When I say "480x480-24bitmap" you understand me even better? So where is the problem???? To me an "image" consists of a bitmap plus other information like size and/or a color table. But if someone were to use the word "bitmap" to refer to what I would call an "image", I would still understand them and not accuse them of destroying the english language since the most relevant part of an image is the bitmap after all. So let's get back to talking graphics, not semantics!!! -- Bill || ...!purdue!bouma