From octave-graphics-request at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu  Sun Jul 30 10:52:34 2000
Subject: Re: handel graphics
From: Joao Cardoso <jcardoso at inescporto dot pt>
To: octave-graphics at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:54:13 +0100

Rafael Laboissiere wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Jul 29, 2000 at 08:34:54PM -0400, Julian A. de Marchi, Ph.D. wrote:

...

> > jwe is right to force the issue in terms of toolkit independence.  But this
> > also seems to have killed subsequent development.

I agree. Those who are C++ programmers should make proposals to this
list before engaging on the project.

Of course all us can discuss things like the script user "API". For
example, should it be Matlab compatible? The same applies to the
graphics script "API".

In my opinion, designing a C++ library-independent API will be almost
impossible and doomed to inaction. I also think that when (if) designing
the API, one should have single libraries and not desktop environments
in mind.

I tried to make a C API design exercice for plotting, with gnuplot,
plplot and pgplot in mind, and I gave up after a while: there are many
different ways of doing the same thing in any of them, and I couldn't
find a common framework.

...

> > Meanwhile, I have the inane suggestion to term Octave's graphics API (the
> > script-level one) "Handel Graphics", further confusing the origin of the
> > term "Octave", paying respects to a great composer at the same time, and
> > further (falsely) insinuating that "Octave" has anything to do with music
> > whatsoever.  More than anything it's a trump for Matlab, since Handel has
> > obviously offered the world loads more than Handle Graphics (TM) ever could.
> 
> Very nice: "Handel (Graphics) makes Octave wonderfully sound".

I agree! Can this be the first step?

But does the name means that we will stick to the "handle" concept or
not? (even the first step is hard...)

Joao