From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94722BDCB for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:11:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ptb-relay04.plus.net (ptb-relay02.plus.net [212.159.14.213]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j7UGBHkR006622 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2005 18:11:17 +0200 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=chetara) by ptb-relay04.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1EA8hh-00051S-19 for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Tue, 30 Aug 2005 17:11:17 +0100 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Does LablTk have a future? Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 17:08:24 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2 References: <4311DA63.4010104@havenrock.com> <200508301445.08793.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <3d13dcfc0508300847414abedb@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <3d13dcfc0508300847414abedb@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200508301708.24941.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 43148525.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 labltk:01 subjective:01 non-standard:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 gpl:01 lgpl:01 statically:01 lgpl:01 presenta:98 ...:98 frog:98 wrote:01 interfaces:01 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.3 (2005-04-27) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=disabled version=3.0.3 On Tuesday 30 August 2005 16:47, David MENTRE wrote: > 2005/8/30, Jon Harrop : > > Why do you think that? > > Hmm. I thought that making postscript or pdf output of an OpenGL > document is difficult, but apparently I'm wrong. Yes, generating PS from OpenGL is very easy (I've done a lot of work on this for Presenta, of course). > > Yes but we gain the ability to have a better interface on all platforms. > > Well, "better" is rather subjective. And not having the native > interface means that people will say "oh, look, this is a non-standard > OCaml program" instead on looking at the application itself. True. I think this is the lesser of evils though. > That's said, if we can have a nice (to be defined ;-) OCaml GUI > toolkit, cross-platform and well documented, we a minimal set of tools > to help design interfaces, I would seriously consider its use. Absolutely. Me too. > > Also, we'd need the library to be free for commercial use. > > I'm usually a proponent of GPL but for such a toolkit, I wouldn't mind > a LGPL or BSD-like license. If it is OCaml then it will have to be statically compiled in, so you'd need that LGPL get-out clause. > I have created a Google group to discuss this: > Homepage: http://groups.google.com/group/ocaml-gui > Group email: ocaml-gui@googlegroups.com > Description: Mailing list to discuss design and development of a > cross-platform Graphic User Interface for the OCaml language I'll cross post this message... -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. Objective CAML for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists