Talk:SCODL
From Just Solve the File Format Problem
(Difference between revisions)
(Created page with "Maybe Page description languages would be a better primary category. TrID calls the .SCD format produced by Image Alchemy "Agfa/Matrix SCODL bitmap". But I suspect it's a...") |
Dan Tobias (Talk | contribs) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
TrID calls the .SCD format produced by Image Alchemy "Agfa/Matrix SCODL bitmap". But I suspect it's actually a bitmap wrapped in a vector format. That would explain why IA can write SCD, but not read it. -[[User:Jsummers|Jsummers]] ([[User talk:Jsummers|talk]]) 20:33, 5 September 2020 (UTC) | TrID calls the .SCD format produced by Image Alchemy "Agfa/Matrix SCODL bitmap". But I suspect it's actually a bitmap wrapped in a vector format. That would explain why IA can write SCD, but not read it. -[[User:Jsummers|Jsummers]] ([[User talk:Jsummers|talk]]) 20:33, 5 September 2020 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :It's got a "Programmer's Guide" and it has opcodes, so it seems kind of programming-language-ish, of a low-level type closer to machine language than higher level languages. Does it describe pages, or just images? Or is there a meaningful distinction between them? Taxonomies/ontologies can get confusing. [[User:Dan Tobias|Dan Tobias]] ([[User talk:Dan Tobias|talk]]) 23:25, 5 September 2020 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :: [https://archive.org/details/SCODLProgrammersGuide/page/n133/mode/2up Appendix B, "Output Devices"] of the manual seems to suggest that it's primarily meant to describe entire physical pages to printers. It does list two ([https://archive.org/details/SCODLProgrammersGuide/page/n143/mode/2up "Number Nine Revolution Graphics Adapter"] and [https://archive.org/details/SCODLProgrammersGuide/page/n145/mode/2up "Targa 16, 24, 32 Graphics Adapter"] entirely electronic output devices, though. But [[Postscript]] can do this too, so I think it still fits in [[Page description languages]]. | ||
| + | :: On that topic, though, Postscript is in all three of [[Programming Languages]], Page description languages, and [[Document]], Document being the category listed in the infobox. Meanwhile [[HP-GL]] is only in [[Graphics]] and Page description languages, with the latter listed in the infobox. [[DVI (Device Independent File Format)|DVI]] is listed on Page description languages the page, but isn't a member of the category (it's only in Document). This despite that, except for Postscript being a full programming language, all three are essentially the same thing. So evidently there isn't a lot of consistency in this area. [[User:Effect2|Effect2]] ([[User talk:Effect2|talk]]) 08:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC) | ||
| + | :::"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" -- Ralph Waldo Emerson | ||
| + | :::But seriously, yes, I do value consistency but have not always achieved it; stuff here can be very inconsistent depending on what the authors felt was a good idea at the time, when things are confusingly ambiguous. [[User:Dan Tobias|Dan Tobias]] ([[User talk:Dan Tobias|talk]]) 15:13, 7 September 2020 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 15:13, 7 September 2020
Maybe Page description languages would be a better primary category.
TrID calls the .SCD format produced by Image Alchemy "Agfa/Matrix SCODL bitmap". But I suspect it's actually a bitmap wrapped in a vector format. That would explain why IA can write SCD, but not read it. -Jsummers (talk) 20:33, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
- It's got a "Programmer's Guide" and it has opcodes, so it seems kind of programming-language-ish, of a low-level type closer to machine language than higher level languages. Does it describe pages, or just images? Or is there a meaningful distinction between them? Taxonomies/ontologies can get confusing. Dan Tobias (talk) 23:25, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
- Appendix B, "Output Devices" of the manual seems to suggest that it's primarily meant to describe entire physical pages to printers. It does list two ("Number Nine Revolution Graphics Adapter" and "Targa 16, 24, 32 Graphics Adapter" entirely electronic output devices, though. But Postscript can do this too, so I think it still fits in Page description languages.
- On that topic, though, Postscript is in all three of Programming Languages, Page description languages, and Document, Document being the category listed in the infobox. Meanwhile HP-GL is only in Graphics and Page description languages, with the latter listed in the infobox. DVI is listed on Page description languages the page, but isn't a member of the category (it's only in Document). This despite that, except for Postscript being a full programming language, all three are essentially the same thing. So evidently there isn't a lot of consistency in this area. Effect2 (talk) 08:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
- But seriously, yes, I do value consistency but have not always achieved it; stuff here can be very inconsistent depending on what the authors felt was a good idea at the time, when things are confusingly ambiguous. Dan Tobias (talk) 15:13, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
