Graphics hierarchy

[Simon Marlow]

> The currently proposal for the Graphics hierarchy looks like=20
> this (IIRC):
>=20
>    Graphics
>       UI
>       Drawing
>       Format
>=20
> I propose changing "Drawing" to "Rendering", because this a=20
> more common
> term in computer graphics. But I'm no native speaker, so I'd=20
> like to hear
> some comments on this.

I like "Rendering".

> Another problem is that in "real world" APIs the above=20
> subcategeories are
> often mixed up a bit. Have a look at the following APIs resp. Haskell
> libraries:
>=20
>    Clean ObjectIO
>    Direct3D
>    FRAN
>    FranTk
>    Fudgets
>    Functional Metapost
>    GIFWriter
>    GLUT
>    GTK+
>    Haven
>    HGL
>    Inventor
>    MOTIF
>    OpenGL
>    Pan
>    TclHaskell
>    Win32
>    X toolkit intrinsics
>    Xaw
>    Xlib
>    Xmu

Ok, I think I might be tempted to put the X libraries in their own =
hierarchy, because they don't fit completely into either Rendering or =
UI:

  Graphics
     Rendering
       HGL
       OpenGL
       Direct3D
       Pan
       FRAN
       Haven
     UI
       ObjectIO
       FranTk
       Fudgets
       Motif
       Gtk+
       GLUT
       TkHaskell
     Format
       GIF
       PNG
       JPEG
       TIFF
       ...
     X
       Xt
       Xlib
       Xmu
       Xaw

>    Functional Metapost
>    Inventor

I don't know enough about these.

>    Win32

The Win32 API includes not just Graphics but also Systemy stuff, so =
there are two options: either it has its own top-level category, or we =
scatter the various parts of the Win32 API around the hierarchy (a =
similar problem arises with Posix).  I think I prefer the former.

Cheers,
	Simon