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