|
From: Mojca M. <moj...@gm...> - 2011-01-19 02:15:10
|
Dear list,
a seemingly endless list of terminals causes a lot of confusion before
somebody finds the terminal of choice.
Would it make sense to split them according to their usage into a few
categories, like:
- interactive
- images (binary, text-based; but that doesn't have to be split)
- for post-processing (mostly the latex-related ones)
- printing
I have written just a few examples (I left out many), just to get the idea:
interactive
aqua Interface to graphics terminal server for Mac OS X
dumb ascii art for anything that prints text
x11 X11 Window System
images
canvas HTML Canvas object
pdf PDF (Portable Document File) file driver
pdfcairo pdf terminal based on cairo
png PNG images using libgd and TrueType fonts
pngcairo png terminal based on cairo
postscript PostScript graphics, including EPSF embedded files (*.eps)
svg W3C Scalable Vector Graphics driver
require for post-processing
lua Lua generic terminal driver
mp MetaPost plotting standard
epslatex LaTeX picture environment using graphicx package
latex LaTeX picture environment
pslatex LaTeX picture environment with PostScript \specials
pstex plain TeX with PostScript \specials
tikz TeX TikZ graphics macros via the lua script driver
printing
pcl5 HP Designjet 750C, HP Laserjet III/IV, etc. (many options)
hp2623A HP2623A and maybe others
hp2648 HP2648 and HP2647
hpgl HP7475 and relatives [number of pens] [eject]
(maybe another category of obsolete ones :)
That way it would be much easier to find the most suitable terminal to
do the job. I would also devote a column in the output to make it
clear whether some terminal creates vector or raster graphic.
(Possibly also a column for text/binary, but that is way less
important.)
Mojca
|