🚀 go-pugleaf

>/* Written  7:19 pm  May 15, 1986 by jimomura@lsuc.UUCP */
>
>     OK.  VDI isn't as bad as I thought.  The explanation I got
>earlier seems to have been for the IBM GKS.  How thorough is VDI?
>NAPLPS is extensible and already defined for 3 dimensional work.
>It's current resolution is up to 4K by 4K and is conceptually
>relative based on a 1 * 1 (* 1) screen (a "unit screen").  There
>are complete character sets including symbols for Copyrights and
>Trade Marks.  There are graphics characters and color and texture
>capabilities.  You can buy NAPLPS terminals (Sony has a particularly
>nice one) or convert many Personal Computers such as IBM's and Apples
>and Commodore 64's (this latter isn't apparently a wonderful
>NAPLPS machine, but it's adequate).
>
>     It seems to me that they overlap in philosophy at the least.

Actually, NAPLPS is infinite precision. The 4K standard, and similar earlier
standards, are just sets of minimum parameters that terminal designers
should hope to have. A 4K page on a 256 terminal will draw properly,
although all the text sizes you used may not be there so you might get some
ugly wrappings, etc.

NAPLPS's character sets are fairly complete, especially when you are using
the kanji extensions.

NAPLPS on an IBM is quite good, especially with the Revolution 9 or similar
graphics board.

I have heard a rumour that the NAPLPS package for the Commodore 64 is free,
or at least sold at some extremely low price like 10$.

Andy "Krazy" Glew. Gould CSD-Urbana.    USEnet:  ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!aglew
1101 E. University, Urbana, IL 61801    ARPAnet: aglew@gswd-vms