🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1214@lsuc.UUCP> jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (Jim Omura) writes:
>
>OK.  VDI isn't as bad as I thought.
>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").
>     It seems to me that they overlap in philosophy at the least.

Not at all.  NAPLPS is an excellent interchange format.  This will
probably be what your PC will "See" coming from the CD-ROM.

VDI is simply a concept of implementation for NAPLPS.  As you point
out, NAPLPS is 4Kx4K, so you need to be able to "Scroll" windows
that are smaller than this figure.  You may also want to leave
on NAPLPS presentation in one window while you view another one
in another window.  If you want to describe "windows" in NAPLPS,
that does not have do dictate that these will be the only windows
you see on the screen.

VDI in whichever form (PC, GEM, OS-9, MAC,...) would have a relatively
simple task of managing the various NAPLPS displays.  The VDI would
also have the task of "interpreting" the NAPLPS codes into the
Graphics routines which display them.

I would hope that NAPLPS becomes more commonly accepted as an
interchange and storage format, the way ASCII is accepted as
an interchange and storage format for UNIX text based systems.

Imagine if VI only saved its "/tmp/EX$$" format, with it's linkage
pointers, dead space, and "management" information.  Nothing but
"VI" oriented programs could display them.