Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!execu!sequoia!rpp386!woody From: woody@rpp386.cactus.org (Woodrow Baker) Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript Subject: Re: Compiled PostScript Summary: true Message-ID: <17614@rpp386.cactus.org> Date: 10 Jan 90 13:11:26 GMT References: <1666@intercon.com> <1701@intercon.com> Organization: River Parishes Programming, Plano, TX Lines: 24 In article <1701@intercon.com>, amanda@mermaid.intercon.com (Amanda Walker) writes: > to stoop to the lengths Woody advocates. The single thing I can think > of which has no documented way to be discovered is pixel shape (write- > white vs. write-black, for example, or elliptical pixels on a laser > recorder). This seems more of an oversight than a design flaw, though. true enough. One can sort of find the info, but it is not really totaly reliable because it can be changed by the user, but if you characterize a list of machines as to their rendering modes, and then look the printer name up, you can indirectly obtain this info. It is *NOT* inherent in either the printer or the lanuage, short of peeking into the roms. Indeed, there are some very fundamental reasons to need the knowlege of whether it is a black-writer vs a white-writer. Due to the the techniques used, a blackwriter has more resolution on fine detail, and a white writer can lose single pixels. one often needs to alter a screen, for example, darken it for a white-writer etc. Currently the only solution seems to be the name lookup, provided someone has not changed it. Cheers Woody > > --Amanda > --