[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: portable CLOS window system
Rob, can you clarify your characterization of the portable CLOS window system?
Below, I've tried to show the various interface layers that you mentioned. What
exactly do you see as the responsibilities of each layer? In general, what sort
of data goes across each interface? In this picture, what exactly is it that we
should refer to as "the window system"?
. Application toolkit
. Window system interface
. ^ ^
. | |
. V Portable
. Window system-independent interface ...........................
. ^ Implementation-dependent
. | |
. V V
Lo Base protocol
Consider graphics output and handling specific input events. Would these appear
in the WSII? If so, how will the greatest-common-denominator effect be avoided?
If not, how will an abstract "intent" for these be specified?
Look+feel control: Should this be possible across the standard window system
interface? Or is look+feel an implementation-dependent aspect?
BTW, the X Consortium is developing a standard for "core components". This
would standardize a *functional* programming interface to certain common UI
objects (e.g. buttons, menus, etc.) that is explictly look+feel-free. The
intent is that this common core interface could be implemented to exhibit "any"
look+feel. Hopefully, the core standard spec will also be language-independent.
[I am not alone among the non-C people in the working group, although sometimes
I worry.] Perhaps the core could even be toolkit-independent. [I am alone among
the non-Xt people and I definitely worry!] Rob, where would something like this
fit into your picture?