But GP used client and server correctly, no? In the traditional model, the server renders the text it received from the client. Nowadays, the client renders it itself and pushes the whole bitmap to the server.
Yes? But older X code used to use server side font rendering. The move to client side is the new thing. So this still sounds like the original comment got it right, though I guess ordered in a way that might make it ambiguous.
Indeed, I probably could have made it more clear I was referring to the situation in Gtk 2, but I figured it was implicit given that, of Gtk 1 and Gtk 2, only the latter renders text in client-side pixmaps/pixbufs.
I don't get how it could be the other way around? The domain here is controlling a display. A server does stuff, a client requests it. The X naming is exactly natural. The server draws and controls hardware, the client requests it.
On traditional GUIs nomeclature (not X), client is what is running on the local hardware, server is where the actual process is running, aka thin clients.
It is also the nomenclature when talking about RDP, VNC, and many others,
