Declarative graphics

  • Richard Helm
  • Kim Marriott
Session 5b: Applications And Teaching
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 225)


A standard approach to describe pictures is the use of formal grammars. This, and the strong link between definite clause grammars and logic programming, motivates the design of the declarative picture specification language presented here. The language is relational and rule based. A specification is akin to a definite clause grammar and may be executed bottom-up for picture recognition or top-down for generation. Picture execution provides features of constraint based graphic programming. A picture specification may be viewed as a data structure allowing programs to reason about a picture's structure and to manipulate it for dynamic and interactive applications.

Keywords and Categories

I.2.3-Logic Programming I.3.4-Picture Description Languages 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [Bor81]
    A. Borning, The Programming Language Aspects of ThingLab, a Constraint-Oriented Simulation Laboratory, ACM Trans. Prog. Lang. and Systems Vol. 3, (4), Oct. 1981, 343–387.Google Scholar
  2. [BrS84]
    M.H. Brown & R. Sedgwick, A System for Algorithm Animation, Computer Graphics SIGGRAPH 84 ACM, Vol. 18, (3) July 1984, 177–186.Google Scholar
  3. [CLP84]
    T.Y. Chen, J. Lassez & G.S. Port, Maximal Unifiable Subsets and Minimal Non-Unifiable Subsets, Tech. Rep. 84/16, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Melbourne, 1984.Google Scholar
  4. [Col78]
    A. Colmerauer, Metapmorphosis Grammars, Natural Language Communication with Computer, (L. Bolc,Ed), Springer Verlag, 1978, 133–189.Google Scholar
  5. [Dom84]
    A. Doman, Graphic Procedures for Prolog. SzKI, Hungary, June 1984.Google Scholar
  6. [EgC83]
    P. Eggert & K. Chow, Logic Programming Graphics and Infinite Terms. TR-83-02, Dept. of Computer Science, UCSB, June 1983.Google Scholar
  7. [FoD82]
    J.D. Foley & A.V. Dam, Fundamentals of Interactive Computer Graphics, The Systems Programming Series, Addison-Wesley, 1982.Google Scholar
  8. [Fu82]
    K.S. Fu, Syntactic Pattern Recognition and Applications, Prentice-Hall, 1982.Google Scholar
  9. [FuB78]
    R.P. Futrelle & G. Barta, Towards the Design of an Intrinsically Graphical Language, Computer Graphics SIGGRAPH 78, Vol. 12 (3), Aug. 1978, 28–32.Google Scholar
  10. [Gip75]
    J. Gips, Shape Grammars and their Uses, Birkhauser-Verlag, Basel 1975Google Scholar
  11. [GWA84]
    J.C. Gonzalez, M.H. Williams & I.E. Aitchison, Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Prolog for a CAD Application, Computer Graphics and Applications, IEEE, Mar. 1984, 67–75.Google Scholar
  12. [HeM86]
    A.R. Helm & K. Marriott, Declarative Graphics, Melbourne University, Forthcoming.Google Scholar
  13. [Jul82]
    S.M.P. Julien, Graphics in Micro-PROLOG, DOC 82/17, Imperial College, London, Sept. 1982.Google Scholar
  14. [Ker82]
    B.W. Kernighan, PIC — A Language for Typesetting Graphics, Software Practice & Experience, Vol. 12 (1), Jan. 1982, 1–21.Google Scholar
  15. [Kow82]
    R.A. Kowalski, Logic as a Computer Language for Children, ECAI-82, 1982.Google Scholar
  16. [Kow83]
    R.A. Kowalski, Logic Programming, IFIP, 1983, 133–145.Google Scholar
  17. [Llo84]
    J.W. Lloyd, Foundations of Logic Programming, Springer-Verlag, 1984.Google Scholar
  18. [MaS78]
    W.R. Mallgren & A.C. Shaw, Graphical Transformations and Hierarchic Picture Structures, Computer Graphics and Image Processing, Academic Press, Vol. 8, 1978, 237–258.Google Scholar
  19. [Mal82]
    W.R. Mallgren, Formal Specification of Graphic Data Types, Transactions on Programming Languages, ACM, Vol. 4, (4), 1982, 687–710.Google Scholar
  20. [Nai85]
    L. Naish, Negation and Control in Prolog, Ph.D. thesis, Dept. Computer Science, Melbourne University, 1985Google Scholar
  21. [NeS79]
    W.M. Newman, R.F. Sproull, Principles of Interactive Computer Graphics, McGraw Hill Ltd. 1979Google Scholar
  22. [Per83]
    F. Pereira, Can Drawing be Liberated from the Von Neumann Style? Tech. Note 282, AI Center, SRI International. June 1983Google Scholar
  23. [PeW80]
    F.C.N. Pereira, D.H.D. Warren, Definite Clause Grammars for Language Analysis — A Survey of the Formalism and a Comparison with Augmented Transition Networks, Artificial Intelligence North Holland Vol. 13 1980 231–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [Pik83]
    R. Pike, Graphics in Overlapping Bitmap Layers, Transactions on Graphics ACM New York Vol. 2 (2) 1983 135–160Google Scholar
  25. [PoD84]
    T. Porter, T. Duff, Compositing Digital Images, Computer Graphics SIGGRAPH 84 ACM Vol. 18 (3) July 1984 253–259Google Scholar
  26. [Sti75]
    G. Stiny, Pictorial and Formal Aspects of Shape and Shape Grammars, Birkhauser-Verlag, Basel 1975Google Scholar
  27. [Sut66]
    I.E. Sutherland, Computer Graphics: 10 Unsolved Problems, Datamation 22–27 May 1966Google Scholar
  28. [TDM85]
    J.Y.L. Texier, A. Doman, B.S. Marksjo, R. Sharpe, Use of Prolog with Graphics including CAD, Ausgraph 85 Brisbane August 1985 81–85Google Scholar
  29. [WaP82]
    D.H.D. Warren, F. Pereira. An Efficient, Easily Adaptable System for Interpreting Natural Language Queries, Am. J. Computational Linguistics. 8(3–4),110–119. 1982Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Helm
    • 1
  • Kim Marriott
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations