I love this seeing is believing in tech.

DPI independence was already supported, because each X Windows terminal was different beast, hence layout managers and multiple coordinate systems.

"Common Desktop Environment: Internationalization Programmer's Guide"

https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/references/unix/digital/COSEPR...

"Developing Applications for the Display PostScript System"

https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/references/unix/digital/AQ15WB...

Coordinate handling chapters.

"Common Desktop Environment: Application Builder User's Guide"

Attaching objects chapter for layouts

https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/references/unix/digital/APPBLD...

"Common Desktop Environment: Programmer's Overview"

https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/references/unix/digital/PROG_O...

"Common Desktop Environment: Style Guide and Certification Checklist"

Access and the Style Guide chapter

https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19683-01/816-0284/6m6phpvqa/inde...

And here is some of the stuff being done back in the day, https://park.org/Guests/Trace/pavilion/unixshar.htm

DPI independence definitely existed in some forms. (Heck, even GDI theoretically had DPI independence baked in, since I guess everyone was inspired by PostScript et al.) And I never really disputed layout management, since I was aware that some systems were doing that, too. I dispute that most systems from that time period could do what we do today and scale correctly on high resolution displays. I’ve had enough experience setting Xresources to be skeptical. But frankly, I just don’t have enough experience with Motif and CDE to really stake a claim here. So I’ll fold on that one: DPI scaling is certainly not absent.

I was most curious to hear about screen readers, because I wasn’t aware of any accessibility protocols or buses on UNIX-likes prior to ATK. But I’m guessing CDE desktops really don’t have that. Maybe the easiest way to find out would be to just boot up CDE and find out, since I’m pretty sure it’s still maintained…