[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Needed: Info on LISP X based toolkits
- To: Mike McMahon <MMcM@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>
- Subject: Re: Needed: Info on LISP X based toolkits
- From: Mike Thome <mthome@VAX.BBN.COM>
- Date: Thu, 06 Oct 88 21:49:08 -0400
- Cc: lanning.pa@Xerox.COM, cl-windows@THINK.COM, CommonLoops.pa@Xerox.COM
- In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 06 Oct 88 14:52:00 -0400. <19881006185258.3.MMCM@OWL.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Redistributed: CommonLoops.pa
"I wonder how the word "standard" crept into your
discourse. Or rather, why you think the existence of one
standard precludes all others. The beauty of a reasonable,
low-level standard like X and its direct CLX analogue is that you
can have platform hardware independence and peaceful coexistence
of a multitude of toolkits, or standards if you prefer."
Wazzat?!? Obviously you are using some definition of "standard" I have
been previously unaware of... The issue at hand (I thought) is to work
towards an OO-{window,user-interface}-{system,toolkit,"standard"} that we
could all more-or-less agree is sortof right enough to actually use so
that we can all write portable user interfaces. If X/clx/clue/whatever is to
be one of MANY (key word here) possible platforms to build a REAL
standard user interface package on, then it is the wrong level to be
arguing at.