Re: You need to be thinking *phototypesetter,* not Linotype if you want to go that way.
> Linotype machines are not desk sized.
You clearly have never seen some of the desks on Mahogany Row. Besides, a good bit of the bulk is the melting pot and casting operation. Not to mention the expanding spaces. I think we can do without full justification.
> What you've missed about Linotype m/cs is they cope with unlimited copies by casting lead copies of the raw font forms.
Didn't actually miss that. Met my first Linotype in 1958 or so. Picked up a fresh slug. Anyway, my point ws that the basic ideas behind coded slugs and automated sorting would provide a way of storing the characters in a way that could be read back. Useful for operations like "delete character". I'm not sure how you propose to implement sceen-edit with a phototypsetter. Not to mention how you plan to develop each frame (Although there was a Vctorian-era camera with built-in developer. Sort of like a proto-Polaroid).
> Consider the proverbial 24 * 80 display.
My first non-printing display was more like 12x72, or even 8x40, but agreed, the matrix (or character) magazines would need to be large. OTOH:
> That's 1920 copies of any character to cover all the possibilities.
Well, a screen ful of AAAAAA would be a bit boring. and I suspect that the 48 characters typical of early (pre 1960 or so) Data Processing equipment would do for a character set. BTW: I've seen older books which substituted characters, possibly when the supply of, e.g. 'Q' ran out while setting a page. Not to mention the common use of lower-case l for numeral one, and occasionally upper-case O for numeral zero.Humans are adaptable.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
