Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.postscript > #2117 > unrolled thread

The Dawn of Desktop Publishing - Computerphile [Apple Laserwriter history video - youtube]

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.postscript

Contents

  The Dawn of Desktop Publishing - Computerphile [Apple Laserwriter history video - youtube] luser- -droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-11 22:53 -0800
    Re: The Dawn of Desktop Publishing - Computerphile [Apple Laserwriter history video - youtube] luser- -droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-13 14:10 -0800
      Re: The Dawn of Desktop Publishing - Computerphile [Apple Laserwriter history video - youtube] jdaw1 <jdawiseman@gmail.com> - 2014-12-19 12:19 -0800
        Re: The Dawn of Desktop Publishing - Computerphile [Apple Laserwriter history video - youtube] luser- -droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-19 17:02 -0800
          Re: The Dawn of Desktop Publishing - Computerphile [Apple Laserwriter history video - youtube] rodd@panix.com (Rod Dorman) - 2014-12-20 01:20 +0000
            Re: The Dawn of Desktop Publishing - Computerphile [Apple Laserwriter history video - youtube] luser- -droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2014-12-19 21:02 -0800
          Re: The Dawn of Desktop Publishing - Computerphile [Apple Laserwriter history video - youtube] jdaw1 <jdawiseman@gmail.com> - 2014-12-20 10:26 -0800
        Re: The Dawn of Desktop Publishing - Computerphile [Apple Laserwriter history video - youtube] rodd@panix.com (Rod Dorman) - 2014-12-20 01:13 +0000

#2117 — The Dawn of Desktop Publishing - Computerphile [Apple Laserwriter history video - youtube]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rCNnMZrFUQ

12 minute history of LaserWriter, Postscript, early Apple/Adobe anecdotes.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#2118

On Friday, December 12, 2014 12:53:32 AM UTC-6, luser- -droog wrote:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rCNnMZrFUQ
> 
> 12 minute history of LaserWriter, Postscript, early Apple/Adobe anecdotes.

More relevant videos by the same guy.

The Font Magicians 19:30
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAdspOtgciQ

Programming in Postscript 15:22
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_NXz7I5dQc

Reverse Polish Notation and the Stack 13:31
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ha78yWRDlE
(includes correct pronounciation of Lukasiewicz,
The "Pole" of Polish-Notation.)

different guy, same group:
The True Power of the Matrix 14:46
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQ60rFwh2ig
An excellent presentation of linear transformations 
with matrices. Very pertinent to Postscript.

Triangles to Pixels
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aweqeMxDnu4

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2130

> Programming in Postscript 15:22
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_NXz7I5dQc

At time 4:12 in 
	https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_NXz7I5dQc 
the narrator shows a printout of a PostScript program. The first line of that program is "%!PS-Adobe-2.0". As discussed in
	https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.postscript/mW5wSd-3aPY
such a first line promises a PostScript program obeying document structure rules.

¿Does that program obey?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2131

On Friday, December 19, 2014 2:19:18 PM UTC-6, jdaw1 wrote:
> > Programming in Postscript 15:22
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_NXz7I5dQc
> 
> At time 4:12 in 
> 	https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_NXz7I5dQc 
> the narrator shows a printout of a PostScript program. The first line of that program is "%!PS-Adobe-2.0". As discussed in
> 	https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.postscript/mW5wSd-3aPY
> such a first line promises a PostScript program obeying document structure rules.
> 
> ¿Does that program obey?

(As I guess you've already guessed) No, it doesn't.
I don't recall all the details, but a minimal set of DSC 1.0
comments must include %%BoundingBox and %%Pages (and a few 
others). 2.0 adds a few more requirements (which I also don't
recall).

I debated whether to comment on that, but the rest of his
presentation was so good, I didn't want to blemish the page.
But I did invite everyone there to visit this group. So,
we can straighten them out when they get here. :)

Unfortunately, there's no standard technique for declaring
conformance to a particular standard lang. For the most part,
the higher levels are supersets of the lower levels. So one
technique is to target level 1 exclusively.

Another technique is to target level 1, but including 
emulations of any higher-level operators that are needed.
Eg., something like:

    /selectfont where {pop}{ 
        /selectfont {
            %implementation using level-1 operators
        } def
    } ifelse

For a few oddball operators there are also some semantic
differences between level 2 and 3. In particular `copypage`
in level 2 outputs the raster buffer but does not call
`erasepage`. In level 3, `copypage` is a synonym of `showpage`,
so it can no longer be used for incremental rendering this
way.

In ghostscript, there's a non-standard operator `.setlanguagelevel`
which does allow you to request level-2 or level-3 semantics
where they differ. But of course, being non-standard, it doesn't
completely solve the problem for everybody everywhere.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2133

In article <28cc97dd-aa6e-4490-973d-1e67d12367da@googlegroups.com>,
luser- -droog  <mijoryx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Friday, December 19, 2014 2:19:18 PM UTC-6, jdaw1 wrote:
>> > Programming in Postscript 15:22
>> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_NXz7I5dQc
>> 
>> At time 4:12 in 
>> 	https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_NXz7I5dQc 
>> the narrator shows a printout of a PostScript program. The first line of that program is "%!PS-Adobe-2.0". As discussed in
>> 	https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.postscript/mW5wSd-3aPY
>> such a first line promises a PostScript program obeying document structure rules.
>> 
>> ¿Does that program obey?
>
>(As I guess you've already guessed) No, it doesn't.
>   ...
>Unfortunately, there's no standard technique for declaring
>conformance to a particular standard lang. For the most part,

The DSC %%LanguageLevel: comment would be the way to do it.

-- 
					-- Rod --
rodd(at)polylogics(dot)com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2134

On Friday, December 19, 2014 7:20:45 PM UTC-6, Rod Dorman wrote:
> In article <28cc97dd-aa6e-4490-973d-1e67d12367da@googlegroups.com>,
> luser- -droog  <mijoryx@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Friday, December 19, 2014 2:19:18 PM UTC-6, jdaw1 wrote:
> >> > Programming in Postscript 15:22
> >> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_NXz7I5dQc
> >> 
> >> At time 4:12 in 
> >> 	https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_NXz7I5dQc 
> >> the narrator shows a printout of a PostScript program. The first line of that program is "%!PS-Adobe-2.0". As discussed in
> >> 	https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.postscript/mW5wSd-3aPY
> >> such a first line promises a PostScript program obeying document structure rules.
> >> 
> >> ¿Does that program obey?
> >
> >(As I guess you've already guessed) No, it doesn't.
> >   ...
> >Unfortunately, there's no standard technique for declaring
> >conformance to a particular standard lang. For the most part,
> 
> The DSC %%LanguageLevel: comment would be the way to do it.
> 

Much obliged. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2135

> (As I guess you've already guessed) No, it doesn't.

I had guessed, but was being tactful. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2132

In article <30f25c6e-aa41-4446-ac96-893a13b4dbae@googlegroups.com>,
jdaw1  <jdawiseman@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Programming in Postscript 15:22
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_NXz7I5dQc
>
>At time 4:12 in 
>	https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_NXz7I5dQc 
>the narrator shows a printout of a PostScript program. The first line of that program is "%!PS-Adobe-2.0". As discussed in
>	https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.postscript/mW5wSd-3aPY
>such a first line promises a PostScript program obeying document structure rules.
>
>¿Does that program obey?

Nope, not even close, there's no %%Pages: or %%Page: comments.

His description of the first line is completely wrong, it's what DSC
version it's complient with, not the PostScript level.

The DSC %%LanguageLevel: comment is how a document identifies the
minimum PostScript level it needs.

-- 
					-- Rod --
rodd(at)polylogics(dot)com

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.postscript

csiph-web