Xref: utzoo comp.windows.news:1053 comp.lang.postscript:1371
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!ukc!harrier.ukc.ac.uk!eagle.ukc.ac.uk!icdoc!qmc-cs!liam
From: liam@cs.qmc.ac.uk (William Roberts)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.news,comp.lang.postscript
Subject: Re: NeWS and DPS
Summary: DPS does not reimplement NeWS
Message-ID: <790@sequent.cs.qmc.ac.uk>
Date: 5 Jan 89 16:22:08 GMT
References: <66472@ti-csl.CSNET> <6139@hoptoad.uucp>
Reply-To: liam@cs.qmc.ac.uk (William Roberts)
Organization: Computer Science Dept, Queen Mary College, University of London, UK.
Lines: 15
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Keywords:

If DPS reimplements NeWS with all the names changed, then
Adobe's pre-release stuff was a lie from start to finish.

The essential difference between DPS and NeWS is that DPS has
*NO INPUT MODEL*. DPS is purely another graphics output
language and so can be "totally compatible with Printer
PostSCript" just like the Adobe blurb says. It also uses the
underlying window system to provide fragments of drawing
surface, so it doesn't include the window system aspects of
NeWS: no silly-shaped windows.
-- 

William Roberts         ARPA: liam@cs.qmc.ac.uk  (gw: cs.ucl.edu)
Queen Mary College      UUCP: liam@qmc-cs.UUCP
LONDON, UK              Tel:  01-975 5250