Re: Canvas shortcomings

[Mark <jamess1 wwnet net>]

On 17 Jun 2001, Peter Williams wrote:

> 
> On 17 Jun 2001 22:59:04 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
> > I think the concern is eventually having a consistent API for
> > different types of rendering - not because you can't program around
> > different interfaces - but primarily reduce the amount of learning for
> > and work for the programmer.
> > 
> 
> I think Lauris has a point, though, in that you can't make the API
> over-consistent: eg,
> 
> 	a. GnomeCanvas needs to be able to contain widgets
> 	b. Printing widgets doesn't make much sense [1]
> 
> [1] Well, certainly it would be nice to be able to. And, with enough
> work, it could be possible -- "enough" meaning "I don't know how much
> but my gut feeling is 'a lot'."
> 
> So I think Lauris is right that you can't have one Dream API that does
> everything optimally well. But he's also right that there are certainly
> common themes that printing and rendering have in common.
> 

What do call Mac OS X? Or how about NeWS which is over 10 years old? These
both use a postsript imaging model. Postscript as I said in this thread
is device independent, and therefore truely WYSIWYG. Anything displayed in
postscript can printed just as it's displayed. The screen is just another
output device to postscript. Why postscript is being ignored in this
thread I don't know. People have created a solution, and other people
choose to reinvent it.

Mark