Browse Prior Art Database

Network graphic attention handling (RFC0178)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000004032D
Original Publication Date: 1971-Jun-27
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2000-Sep-13
Document File: 9 page(s) / 23K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

I.W. Cotton: AUTHOR

Abstract

Discussions of network graphic protocols have thus far primarily dealt with protocols for the description of graphic data to be displayed. RFC 86 proposed a Network Standard Graphic Data Stream (NGDS) which would serve to convey graphic images expressed in the Network Standard Display List (NGDL). RFC 94 expanded on this proposal, and pointed out some shortcomings of the original scheme. RFC 125 also replied to RFC 86 with comments and extensions, but also recognized that a protocol for graphic display alone is insufficient to support an interactive graphic system.

This text was extracted from a ASCII document.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 12% of the total text.

Network Working Group Ira W. Cotton

Request for Comments: 178 MITRE

NIC: 7118 June 27, 1971

NETWORK GRAPHIC ATTENTION HANDLING

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Discussions of network graphic protocols have thus far primarily

dealt with protocols for the description of graphic data to be

displayed. RFC 86 proposed a Network Standard Graphic Data Stream

(NGDS) which would serve to convey graphic images expressed in the

Network Standard Display List (NGDL). RFC 94 expanded on this

proposal, and pointed out some shortcomings of the original scheme.

RFC 125 also replied to RFC 86 with comments and extensions, but also

recognized that a protocol for graphic display alone is insufficient

to support an interactive graphic system.

1.1 TOPICS COVERED

The present paper addresses itself to this requirement. The process

of attention handling is briefly described, various graphic

configurations are discussed, input devices are surveyed to identify

the types of data which they produce, and an attention protocol is

suggested.

1.2 VIEWPOINT

It should be made clear at the onset that the discussion which follow

will be from the viewpoint of a graphics user or a graphic

application program serving one or more users. Our concern is with

third-level protocols only. We assume the network is capable of

delivering arbitrary bit streams from terminal to graphic application

program, but don't care how this is accomplished.

2.0 ATTENTION-HANDLING

In order to demonstrate the need for an attention protocol, we must

first define what is meant by "attention" and "attention-handling."

We therefore begin by borrowing the definitions given in a recent

survey of this area(1).

2.1 DEFINITION

Graphic attention handling refers to the processes and techniques

whereby human inputs to a computer graphic system are serviced. An

attention event, or simply "attention," is a stimulus to the graphic

system, such as that resulting from a keystroke or light pen usage,

which presents information to the system. Servicing includes

accepting or detecting the hardware input, processing it to determine

its intended meaning, and either passing this information to a user

routine or taking some _immediate_ action related to the display

and/or its underlying data structure, or both. The emphasis is on

"immediate." Attention-handling is not intended to include any

detailed, application-oriented processing which the attention

information may indicate is to be perfor...