Re: GWindows and a future home for it

[Nick Roberts <nick.roberts@acm.org>]

Stephen Leake wrote:
> I was hoping we would have a more general discussion of whether
> Gwindows is what we want to take forward.
> 
> I've been collecting names in this thread. Here's what I think is the
> current situation:
> ...

Please add me to this list. I actually have my own design, now called 
Titian, which I have not yet published. Its design is quite well advanced, 
but not its implementation.

Titian is designed to be totally non-specific to any platform, and to be 
most suited to Ada 95, in terms of a package structure, naming style, and 
general simplicity, and is not at all derived from any pre-existing non-Ada 
design. It has a comprehensive object-oriented component model (plus an OO 
device model, an OO window model, and an OO 'window manager' model), and 
some innovations. It is readily extensible, and makes provision for 
programs to be able to automatically adapt to widely differing environments 
(hardware capabilities). There are two basic levels of functionality: 
simple raster-based graphics, suitable for desktop GUIs and 
embedded/turnkey systems; advanced scaled graphics, suitable for 
sophisticated desktop GUIs and graphics workstations.

I have done a very small amount of work on a Windows implementation; enough 
to show, I think, that such an implementation is highly viable. Obviously, 
my aim is to make an AdaOS implementation in due course.

I had intended to start a Titian SourceForge project in the near future. 
However, this might be a silly duplication of effort if a GWindows or CLAW 
continuation or successor project is going to be started.

Would anyone be interested in a brief rundown of Titian's design?

-- 
Nick Roberts