computer graphics in the 1950s

Richard legalize at xmission.com
Thu Oct 16 14:50:18 CDT 2008


In article <48F781AD.4090303 at brouhaha.com>,
    Eric Smith <eric at brouhaha.com>  writes:

> Richard wrote:
> > and
> > no before someone gets off on another torturous stretch of the
> > definition, "block" graphics character sets on text terminals don't
> > count either.
> >   
> So now you're adding a constraint on the pixel size?  That seems rather 
> arbitrary to me.

Characters are not pixels, so no, I'm not setting a constraing on the
pixel size.  I *am* arbitrarily excluding text terminals with graphic
character sets.  Its not graphics in any sense that a practitioner of
computer graphics would call it.  If it were, bitmapped based displays

Since I'm the one asking the question, I get to decide what the
question means.  This isn't the floor of the US House of
Representatives.
-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download
      <http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/download/index.html>

        Legalize Adulthood! <http://blogs.xmission.com/legalize/>



More information about the cctalk mailing list