text:
DisplayPort

DisplayPort (DP) is a proprietary digital display interface developed by a consortium of PC and chip manufacturers and standardized by the Video Electronics Standards Association (VESA). It is primarily used to connect a video source to a display device such as a computer monitor. It can also carry audio, USB, and other forms of data.

DisplayPort was designed to replace VGA, FPD-Link, and Digital Visual Interface (DVI). It is backward compatible with other interfaces, such as DVI and High-Definition Multimedia Interface (HDMI), through the use of either active or passive adapters.

It is the first display interface to rely on packetized data transmission, a form of digital communication found in technologies such as Ethernet, USB, and PCI Express. It permits the use of internal and external display connections. Unlike legacy standards that transmit a clock signal with each output, its protocol is based on small data packets known as micro packets, which can embed the clock signal in the data stream, allowing higher resolution using fewer pins. The use of data packets also makes it extensible, meaning more features can be added over time without significant changes to the physical interface.

DisplayPort is able to transmit audio and video simultaneously, although each can be transmitted without the other. The video signal path can range from six to sixteen bits per color channel, and the audio path can have up to eight channels of 24-bit, 192kHz uncompressed PCM audio. A bidirectional, half-duplex auxiliary channel carries device management and device control data for the Main Link, such as VESA EDID, MCCS, and DPMS standards. The interface is also capable of carrying bidirectional USB signals.

The interface uses a differential signal that is not compatible with DVI or HDMI. However, dual-mode DisplayPort ports are designed to transmit a single-link DVI or HDMI protocol (TMDS) across the interface through the use of an external passive adapter, enabling compatibility mode and converting the signal from 3.3 to 5 volts. For analog VGA/YPbPr and dual-link DVI, a powered active adapter is required for compatibility and does not rely on dual mode. Active VGA adapters are powered directly by the DisplayPort connector, while active dual-link DVI adapters typically rely on an external power source such as USB.

1.0 to 1.1
The first version, 1.0, was approved by VESA on 3 May 2006. Version 1.1 was ratified on 2 April 2007, and version 1.1a on 11 January 2008.

DisplayPort 1.0–1.1a allow a maximum bandwidth of 10.8Gbit/s (8.64Gbit/s data rate) over a standard 4-lane main link. DisplayPort cables up to 2 meters in length are required to support the full 10.8Gbit/s bandwidth. DisplayPort 1.1 allows devices to implement alternative link layers such as fiber optic, allowing a much longer reach between source and display without signal degradation, although alternative implementations are not standardized. It also includes HDCP in addition to DisplayPort Content Protection (DPCP). The DisplayPort1.1a standard can be downloaded for free from the VESA website.

1.2
DisplayPort version 1.2 was introduced on 7 January 2010. The most significant improvement of this version is the doubling of the data rate to 17.28Gbit/s in High Bit Rate 2 (HBR2) mode, which allows increased resolutions, higher refresh rates, and greater color depth, such as at 60Hz 10bpc RGB. Other improvements include multiple independent video streams (daisy-chain connection with multiple monitors) called Multi-Stream Transport (MST), facilities for stereoscopic 3D, increased AUX channel bandwidth (from 1Mbit/s to 720Mbit/s), more color spaces including xvYCC, scRGB, and Adobe RGB 1998, and Global Time Code (GTC) for sub 1μs audio/video synchronisation. Also Apple Inc.'s Mini DisplayPort connector, which is much smaller and designed for laptop computers and other small devices, is compatible with the new standard.

1.2a
DisplayPort version 1.2a was released in January 2013 and may optionally include VESA's Adaptive Sync. AMD's FreeSync uses the DisplayPort Adaptive-Sync feature for operation. FreeSync was first demonstrated at CES 2014 on a Toshiba Satellite laptop by making use of the Panel-Self-Refresh (PSR) feature from the Embedded DisplayPort standard, and after a proposal from AMD, VESA later adapted the Panel-Self-Refresh feature for use in standalone displays and added it as an optional feature of the main DisplayPort standard under the name "Adaptive-Sync" in version 1.2a. As it is an optional feature, support for Adaptive-Sync is not required for a display to be DisplayPort 1.2a-compliant.

1.3
DisplayPort version 1.3 was approved on 15 September 2014. This standard increases overall transmission bandwidth to 32.4Gbit/s with the new HBR3 mode featuring 8.1Gbit/s per lane (up from 5.4Gbit/s with HBR2 in version 1.2), for a total data throughput of 25.92Gbit/s after factoring in 8b/10b encoding overhead. This bandwidth is enough for a 4K UHD display at 120Hz with 24bit/px RGB color, a 5K display  at 60Hz with 30bit/px RGB color, or an 8K UHD display  at 30Hz with 24bit/px RGB color. Using Multi-Stream Transport (MST), a DisplayPort port can drive two 4K UHD displays at 60Hz, or up to four WQXGA  displays at 60Hz with 24bit/px RGB color. The new standard includes mandatory Dual-mode for DVI and HDMI adapters, implementing the HDMI2.0 standard and HDCP2.2 content protection. The Thunderbolt 3 connection standard was originally to include DisplayPort1.3 capability, but the final release ended up with only version 1.2 for Intel® 6000 Series Thunderbolt™ 3 Controllers. Later Intel® 7000 Series Thunderbolt™3 Controllers would come to support DisplayPort1.4 capability including HDR. The VESA's Adaptive Sync feature in DisplayPort version 1.3 remains an optional part of the specification.

1.4
DisplayPort version 1.4 was published 1 March 2016. No new transmission modes are defined, so HBR3 (32.4Gbit/s) as introduced in version 1.3 still remains as the highest available mode. DisplayPort1.4 adds support for Display Stream Compression 1.2 (DSC), Forward Error Correction, HDR10 metadata defined in CTA-861.3, including static and dynamic metadata and the Rec. 2020 color space, for HDMI interoperability, and extends the maximum number of inline audio channels to 32.

1.4a
DisplayPort version 1.4a was published in April 2018. VESA made no official press release for this version. It updated DisplayPort's Display Stream Compression implementation from DSC 1.2 to 1.2a.

2.0
On 26 June 2019, VESA formally released the DisplayPort 2.0 standard. VESA stated that version 2.0 is the first major update to the DisplayPort standard since March 2016, and provides up to a ≈3× improvement in data rate (from 25.92 to 77.37Gbit/s) compared to the previous version of DisplayPort (1.4a), as well as new capabilities to address the future performance requirements of traditional displays. These include beyond 8K resolutions, higher refresh rates and high dynamic range (HDR) support at higher resolutions, improved support for multiple display configurations, as well as improved user experience with augmented/virtual reality (AR/VR) displays, including support for 4K-and-beyond VR resolutions.

According to a roadmap published by VESA in September 2016, a new version of DisplayPort was intended to be launched in "early 2017". It would have improved the link rate from 8.1 to 10.0Gbit/s, a 23% increase. This would have increased the total bandwidth from 32.4Gbit/s to 40.0Gbit/s. However, no new version was released in 2017, likely delayed to make further improvements after the HDMI Forum announced in January 2017 that their next standard (HDMI2.1) would offer up to 48Gbit/s of bandwidth. According to a press release on 3 January 2018, "VESA is also currently engaged with its members in the development of the next DisplayPort standard generation, with plans to increase the data rate enabled by DisplayPort by two-fold and beyond. VESA plans to publish this update within the next 18 months." At CES 2019, VESA announced that the new version would support 8K @ 60Hz without compression and was expected to be released in the first half of 2019.

DP 2.0 configuration examples
With the increased bandwidth enabled by DisplayPort 2.0, VESA offers a high degree of versatility and configurations for higher display resolutions and refresh rates. In addition to the above-mentioned 8K resolution at 60Hz with HDR support, UHBR20 through USB-C as DisplayPort Alt Mode enables a variety of high-performance configurations:

 * Single display resolutions
 * One 16K display @ 60Hz with 10bpc (30bit/px, HDR) RGB/ 4:4:4 color (with DSC)
 * One 10K display @ 60Hz and 8bpc (24bit/px, SDR) RGB/ 4:4:4 color (uncompressed)
 * Dual display resolutions
 * Two 8K displays @ 120Hz and 10bpc (30bit/px, HDR) RGB/ 4:4:4 color (with DSC)
 * Two 4K displays @ 144Hz and 8bpc (24bit/px, SDR) RGB/ 4:4:4 color (uncompressed)
 * Triple display resolutions
 * Three 10K displays @ 60Hz and 10bpc (30bit/px, HDR) RGB/ 4:4:4 color (with DSC)
 * Three 4K displays @ 90Hz and 10bpc (30bit/px, HDR) RGB/ 4:4:4 color (uncompressed)

When using only two lanes on the USB-C connector via DP Alt Mode to allow for simultaneous SuperSpeed USB data and video, DP 2.0 can enable such configurations as:

 * Three 4K displays @ 144Hz and 10bpc (30bit/px, HDR) RGB/ 4:4:4 color (with DSC)
 * Two 4K × 4K displays (for AR/VR headsets) @ 120Hz and 10bpc (30bit/px, HDR) RGB/ 4:4:4 color (with DSC)
 * Three QHD @ 120Hz and 8bpc (24bit/px, SDR) RGB/ 4:4:4 color (uncompressed)
 * One 8K display @ 30Hz and 10bpc (30bit/px, HDR) RGB/ 4:4:4 color (uncompressed)

2.1
VESA announced version 2.1 of the DisplayPort standard on 17 October 2022. This version incorporates the new DP40 and DP80 cable certifications, which test DisplayPort cables for proper operation at the UHBR10 (40Gbit/s) and UHBR20 (80Gbit/s) speeds introduced in version 2.0. Additionally, it revises some of the electrical requirements for DisplayPort devices in order to improve integration with USB4. In VESA's words:

DisplayPort 2.1 has tightened its alignment with the USB Type-C specification as well as the USB4 PHY specification to facilitate a common PHY servicing both DisplayPort and USB4. In addition, DisplayPort 2.1 has added a new DisplayPort bandwidth management feature to enable DisplayPort tunnelling to coexist with other I/O data traffic more efficiently over the USB4 link.

2.1a
VESA announced version 2.1a of the DisplayPort standard on 8 January 2024. This version replaces the DP40 cable certification with the new DP54 certification, which tests DisplayPort cables for proper operation at the UHBR13.5 (54Gbit/s) speed introduced in version 2.0.

Main link
The DisplayPort main link is used for transmission of video and audio. The main link consists of a number of unidirectional serial data channels which operate concurrently, called lanes. A standard DisplayPort connection has 4 lanes, though some applications of DisplayPort implement more, such as the Thunderbolt 3 interface which implements up to 8 lanes of DisplayPort.

In a standard DisplayPort connection, each lane has a dedicated set of twisted-pair wires, and transmits data across it using differential signaling. This is a self-clocking system, so no dedicated clock signal channel is necessary. Unlike DVI and HDMI, which vary their transmission speed to the exact rate required for the specific video format, DisplayPort only operates at a few specific speeds; any excess bits in the transmission are filled with "stuffing symbols".

In DisplayPort versions 1.0–1.4a, the data is encoded using ANSI 8b/10b encoding prior to transmission. With this scheme, only 8 out of every 10 transmitted bits represent data; the extra bits are used for DC balancing (ensuring a roughly equal number of 1s and 0s). As a result, the rate at which data can be transmitted is only 80% of the physical bitrate. The transmission speeds are also sometimes expressed in terms of the "Link Symbol Rate", which is the rate at which these 8b/10b-encoded symbols are transmitted (i.e. the rate at which groups of 10 bits are transmitted, 8 of which represent data). The following transmission modes are defined in version 1.0–1.4a:
 * RBR (Reduced Bit Rate): 1.62Gbit/s bandwidth per lane (162MHz link symbol rate)
 * HBR (High Bit Rate): 2.70Gbit/s bandwidth per lane (270MHz link symbol rate)
 * HBR2 (High Bit Rate 2): 5.40Gbit/s bandwidth per lane (540MHz link symbol rate), introduced in DP1.2
 * HBR3 (High Bit Rate 3): 8.10Gbit/s bandwidth per lane (810MHz link symbol rate), introduced in DP1.3

DisplayPort 2.0 uses 128b/132b encoding; each group of 132 transmitted bits represents 128 bits of data. This scheme has an efficiency of 96.$\overline{96}$%. In addition, a small amount of overhead is added for the link layer control packet and other miscellaneous operations, resulting in an overall efficiency of ≈96.7%. The following transmission modes are added in DP 2.0:
 * UHBR 10 (Ultra High Bit Rate 10): 10.0Gbit/s bandwidth per lane
 * UHBR 13.5 (Ultra High Bit Rate 13.5): 13.5Gbit/s bandwidth per lane
 * UHBR 20 (Ultra High Bit Rate 20): 20.0Gbit/s bandwidth per lane

The total bandwidth of the main link in a standard 4-lane connection is the aggregate of all lanes:
 * RBR: 4 × 1.62Gbit/s = 6.48Gbit/s bandwidth (data rate of 5.184Gbit/s or 648MB/s with 8b/10b encoding)
 * HBR: 4 × 2.70Gbit/s = 10.80Gbit/s bandwidth (data rate of 8.64Gbit/s or 1.08GB/s)
 * HBR2: 4 × 5.40Gbit/s = 21.60Gbit/s bandwidth (data rate of 17.28Gbit/s or 2.16GB/s)
 * HBR3: 4 × 8.10Gbit/s = 32.40Gbit/s bandwidth (data rate of 25.92Gbit/s or 3.24GB/s)
 * UHBR 10: 4 × 10.0Gbit/s = 40.00Gbit/s bandwidth (data rate of 38.69Gbit/s or 4.84GB/s with 128b/132b encoding and FEC)
 * UHBR 13.5: 4 × 13.5Gbit/s = 54.00Gbit/s bandwidth (data rate of 52.22Gbit/s or 6.52GB/s)
 * UHBR 20: 4 × 20.0Gbit/s = 80.00Gbit/s bandwidth (data rate of 77.37Gbit/s or 9.69GB/s)

The transmission mode used by the DisplayPort main link is negotiated by the source and sink device when a connection is made, through a process called Link Training. This process determines the maximum possible speed of the connection. If the quality of the DisplayPort cable is insufficient to reliably handle HBR2 speeds for example, the DisplayPort devices will detect this and switch down to a lower mode to maintain a stable connection. The link can be re-negotiated at any time if a loss of synchronization is detected.

Audio data is transmitted across the main link during the video blanking intervals (short pauses between each line and frame of video data).

Auxiliary channel
The DisplayPort AUX channel is a half-duplex (bidirectional) data channel used for miscellaneous additional data beyond video and audio, such as EDID (I2C) or CEC commands. This bidirectional data channel is required, since the video lane signals are unidirectional from source to display. AUX signals are transmitted across a dedicated set of twisted-pair wires. DisplayPort1.0 specified Manchester encoding with a 2MBd signal rate (1Mbit/s data rate). Version 1.2 of the DisplayPort standard introduced a second transmission mode called FAUX (Fast AUX), which operated at 720MBd with 8b/10b encoding (576Mbit/s data rate), but it was deprecated in version 1.3.

Compatibility and feature support
All DisplayPort cables are compatible with all DisplayPort devices, regardless of the version of each device or the cable certification level.

All features of DisplayPort will function across any DisplayPort cable. DisplayPort does not have multiple cable designs; all DP cables have the same basic layout and wiring, and will support any feature including audio, daisy-chaining, G-Sync/FreeSync, HDR, and DSC.

DisplayPort cables differ in their transmission speed support. DisplayPort specifies seven different transmission modes (RBR, HBR, HBR2, HBR3, UHBR10, UHBR13.5, and UHBR20) which support progressively higher bandwidths. Not all DisplayPort cables are capable of all seven transmission modes. VESA offers certifications for various levels of bandwidth. These certifications are optional, and not all DisplayPort cables are certified by VESA.

Cables with limited transmission speed are still compatible with all DisplayPort devices, but may place limits on the maximum resolution or refresh rate available.

DisplayPort cables are not classified by "version". Although cables are commonly labeled with version numbers, with HBR2 cables advertised as "DisplayPort1.2 cables" for example, this notation is not permitted by VESA. The use of version numbers with cables can falsely imply that a DisplayPort1.4 display requires a "DisplayPort1.4 cable", or that features introduced in version 1.4 such as HDR or DSC will not function with older "DP1.2 cables". DisplayPort cables are classified only by their bandwidth certification level (RBR, HBR, HBR2, HBR3, etc.), if they have been certified at all.

Cable bandwidth and certifications
Not all DisplayPort cables are capable of functioning at the highest levels of bandwidth. Cables may be submitted to VESA for an optional certification at various bandwidth levels. VESA offers five levels of cable certification: Standard, DP8K, DP40, DP54, and DP80. These certify DisplayPort cables for proper operation at the following speeds:

In April 2013, VESA published an article stating that the DisplayPort cable certification did not have distinct tiers for HBR and HBR2 bandwidth, and that any certified standard DisplayPort cable—including those certified under DisplayPort1.1—would be able to handle the 21.6Gbit/s bandwidth of HBR2 that was introduced with the DisplayPort 1.2 standard. The DisplayPort1.2 standard defines only a single specification for High Bit Rate cable assemblies, which is used for both HBR and HBR2 speeds, although the DP cable certification process is governed by the DisplayPort PHY Compliance Test Standard (CTS) and not the DisplayPort standard itself.

The DP8K certification was announced by VESA in January 2018, and certifies cables for proper operation at HBR3 speeds (8.1Gbit/s per lane, 32.4Gbit/s total).

In June 2019, with the release of version 2.0 of the DisplayPort Standard, VESA announced that the DP8K certification was also sufficient for the new UHBR10 transmission mode. No new certifications were announced for the UHBR13.5 and UHBR20 modes. VESA is encouraging displays to use tethered cables for these speeds, rather than releasing standalone cables onto the market.

It should also be noted that the use of Display Stream Compression (DSC), introduced in DisplayPort1.4, greatly reduces the bandwidth requirements for the cable. Formats which would normally be beyond the limits of DisplayPort1.4, such as 4K (38402160) at 144Hz 8bpc RGB/ 4:4:4 (31.4Gbit/s data rate when uncompressed), can only be implemented by using DSC. This would reduce the physical bandwidth requirements by 2–3×, placing it well within the capabilities of an HBR2-rated cable.

This exemplifies why DisplayPort cables are not classified by "version"; although DSC was introduced in version 1.4, this does not mean it needs a so-called "DP1.4 cable" (an HBR3-rated cable) to function. HBR3 cables are only required for applications which exceed HBR2-level bandwidth, not simply any application involving DisplayPort1.4. If DSC is used to reduce the bandwidth requirements to HBR2 levels, then an HBR2-rated cable will be sufficient.

In version 2.1, VESA introduced the DP40 and DP80 cable certification tiers, which validate cables for UHBR10 and UHBR20 speeds respectively. DisplayPort 2.1a introduced DP54 cable certification for UHBR13.5 speed.

Cable length
The DisplayPort standard does not specify any maximum length for cables, though the DisplayPort 1.2 standard does set a minimum requirement that all cables up to 2 meters in length must support HBR2 speeds (21.6Gbit/s), and all cables of any length must support RBR speeds (6.48Gbit/s). Cables longer than 2 meters may or may not support HBR/HBR2 speeds, and cables of any length may or may not support HBR3 speeds or above.

Connectors and pin configuration
DisplayPort cables and ports may have either a "full-size" connector or a "mini" connector. These connectors differ only in physical shape—the capabilities of DisplayPort are the same regardless of which connector is used. Using a Mini DisplayPort connector does not affect performance or feature support of the connection.

Full-size DisplayPort connector
The standard DisplayPort connector (now referred to as a "full-size" connector to distinguish it from the mini connector) was the sole connector type introduced in DisplayPort1.0. It is a 20-pin single-orientation connector with a friction lock and an optional mechanical latch. The standard DisplayPort receptacle has dimensions of 16.10mm (width) × 4.76mm (height) × 8.88mm (depth).

The standard DisplayPort connector pin allocation is as follows:
 * 12 pins for the main link – the main link consists of four shielded twisted pairs. Each pair requires 3 pins; one for each of the two wires, and a third for the shield. (pins 1–12)
 * 2 additional ground pins – (pins 13 and 14)
 * 3 pins for the auxiliary channel – the auxiliary channel uses another 3-pin shielded twisted pair (pins 15–17)
 * 1 pin for HPD – hot-plug detection (pin 18)
 * 2 pins for power – 3.3V power and return line (pins 19 and 20)

Mini DisplayPort connector
The Mini DisplayPort connector was developed by Apple for use in their computer products. It was first announced in October 2008 for use in the new MacBooks and Cinema Display. In 2009, VESA adopted it as an official standard, and in 2010 the specification was merged into the main DisplayPort standard with the release of DisplayPort1.2. Apple freely licenses the specification to VESA.

The Mini DisplayPort (mDP) connector is a 20-pin single-orientation connector with a friction lock. Unlike the full-size connector, it does not have an option for a mechanical latch. The mDP receptacle has dimensions of 7.50mm (width) × 4.60mm (height) × 4.99mm (depth). The mDP pin assignments are the same as the full-size DisplayPort connector.

DP_PWR (pin 20)
Pin 20 on the DisplayPort connector, called DP_PWR, provides 3.3V (±10%) DC power at up to 500mA (minimum power delivery of 1.5W). This power is available from all DisplayPort receptacles, on both source and display devices. DP_PWR is intended to provide power for adapters, amplified cables, and similar devices, so that a separate power cable is not necessary.

Standard DisplayPort cable connections do not use the DP_PWR pin. Connecting the DP_PWR pins of two devices directly together through a cable can create a short circuit which can potentially damage devices, since the DP_PWR pins on two devices are unlikely to have exactly the same voltage (especially with a ±10% tolerance). For this reason, the DisplayPort1.1 and later standards specify that passive DisplayPort-to-DisplayPort cables must leave pin 20 unconnected.

However, in 2013 VESA announced that after investigating reports of malfunctioning DisplayPort devices, it had discovered that a large number of non-certified vendors were manufacturing their DisplayPort cables with the DP_PWR pin connected: "Recently VESA has experienced quite a few complaints regarding troublesome DisplayPort operation that ended up being caused by improperly made DisplayPort cables. These 'bad' DisplayPort cables are generally limited to non-DisplayPort certified cables, or off-brand cables. To further investigate this trend in the DisplayPort cable market, VESA purchased a number of non-certified, off-brand cables and found that an alarmingly high number of these were configured improperly and would likely not support all system configurations.  None of these cables would have passed the DisplayPort certification test, moreover some of these cables could potentially damage a PC, laptop, or monitor."

The stipulation that the DP_PWR wire be omitted from standard DisplayPort cables was not present in the DisplayPort1.0 standard. However, DisplayPort products (and cables) did not begin to appear on the market until 2008, long after version 1.0 had been replaced by version 1.1. The DisplayPort1.0 standard was never implemented in commercial products.

Resolution and refresh frequency limits
The tables below describe the refresh frequencies that can be achieved with each transmission mode. In general, maximum refresh frequency is determined by the transmission mode (RBR, HBR, HBR2, HBR3, UHBR10, UHBR13.5, or UHBR20). These transmission modes were introduced to the DisplayPort standard as follows: However, transmission mode support is not necessarily dictated by a device's claimed "DisplayPort version number". For example, older versions of the DisplayPort Marketing Guidelines allowed a device to be labeled as "DisplayPort 1.2" if it supported the MST feature, even if it didn't support the HBR2 transmission mode. Newer versions of the guidelines have removed this clause, and currently (as of the June 2018 revision) there are no guidelines on the usage of DisplayPort version numbers in products. DisplayPort "version numbers" are therefore not a reliable indication of what transmission speeds a device can support.
 * RBR and HBR were defined in the initial release of the DisplayPort standard, version 1.0
 * HBR2 was introduced in version 1.2
 * HBR3 was introduced in version 1.3
 * UHBR10, UHBR13.5, and UHBR20 were introduced in version 2.0

In addition, individual devices may have their own arbitrary limitations beyond transmission speed. For example, NVIDIA Kepler GK104 GPUs (such as the GeForce GTX 680 and 770) support "DisplayPort 1.2" with the HBR2 transmission mode, but are limited to 540Mpx/s, only 3⁄4 of the maximum possible with HBR2. Consequently, certain devices may have limitations that differ from those listed in the following tables.

To support a particular format, the source and display devices must both support the required transmission mode, and the DisplayPort cable must also be capable of handling the required bandwidth of that transmission mode. (See: Cables and connectors)

Refresh frequency limits for common resolutions
The maximum limits for the RBR and HBR modes are calculated using standard data rate calculations. For UHBR modes, the limits are based on the data efficiency calculations provided by the DisplayPort standard. All calculations assume uncompressed RGB video with CVT-RB v2 timing. Maximum limits may differ if compression (i.e. DSC) or 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 chroma subsampling are used.

Display manufacturers may also use non-standard blanking intervals rather than CVT-RB v2 to achieve even higher frequencies when bandwidth is a constraint. The refresh frequencies in the below table do not represent the absolute maximum limit of each interface, but rather an estimate based on a modern standardized timing formula. The minimum blanking intervals (and therefore the exact maximum frequency that can be achieved) will depend on the display and how many secondary data packets it requires, and therefore will differ from model to model.

{{legend|#FFFFFF|Below 30 Hz}} {{legend|#FFC7C7|30–60Hz}} {{legend|#FFFFBB|60–120Hz}} {{legend|#9EFF9E|120–240Hz}} {{legend|#BBFFDD|Above 240Hz}}

Refresh frequency limits for standard video
Color depth of 8bpc (24bit/px or 16.7 million colors) is assumed for all formats in these tables. This is the standard color depth used on most computer displays. Note that some operating systems refer to this as "32-bit" color depth—this is the same as 24-bit color depth. The 8 extra bits are for alpha channel information, which is only present in software. At the transmission stage, this information has already been incorporated into the primary color channels, so the actual video data transmitted across the cable only contains 24 bits per pixel.

Refresh frequency limits for HDR video
Color depth of 10bpc (30bit/px or 1.07 billion colors) is assumed for all formats in these tables. This color depth is a requirement for various common HDR standards, such as HDR10. It requires 25% more bandwidth than standard 8bpc video.

HDR extensions were defined in version 1.4 of the DisplayPort standard. Some displays support these HDR extensions, but may only implement HBR2 transmission mode if the extra bandwidth of HBR3 is unnecessary (for example, on 4K 60Hz HDR displays). Since there is no definition of what constitutes a "DisplayPort 1.4" device, some manufacturers may choose to label these as "DP 1.2" devices despite their support for DP 1.4 HDR extensions. As a result, DisplayPort "version numbers" should not be used as an indicator of HDR support.

DisplayPort Dual-Mode (DP++)

DisplayPort Dual-Mode (DP++), also called Dual-Mode DisplayPort, is a standard which allows DisplayPort sources to use simple passive adapters to connect to HDMI or DVI displays. Dual-mode is an optional feature, so not all DisplayPort sources necessarily support DVI/HDMI passive adapters, though in practice nearly all devices do. Officially, the "DP++" logo should be used to indicate a DP port that supports dual-mode, but most modern devices do not use the logo.

Devices which implement dual-mode will detect that a DVI or HDMI adapter is attached, and send DVI/HDMI TMDS signals instead of DisplayPort signals. The original DisplayPort Dual-Mode standard (version 1.0), used in DisplayPort1.1 devices, only supported TMDS clock speeds of up to 165MHz (4.95Gbit/s bandwidth). This is equivalent to HDMI1.2, and is sufficient for up to at 60Hz.

In 2013, VESA released the Dual-Mode 1.1 standard, which added support for up to a 300MHz TMDS clock (9.00Gbit/s bandwidth), and is used in newer DisplayPort1.2 devices. This is slightly less than the 340MHz maximum of HDMI1.4, and is sufficient for up to at 120Hz,  at 60Hz, or  at 30Hz. Older adapters, which were only capable of the 165MHz speed, were retroactively termed "Type1" adapters, with the new 300MHz adapters being called "Type2".

Dual-mode limitations

 * Limited adapter speed – Although the pinout and digital signal values transmitted by the DP port are identical to a native DVI/HDMI TMDS source, the transmission lines on a DisplayPort source are AC-coupled (a series capacitor isolates the line from passing DC voltages) while DVI and HDMI TMDS are DC-coupled. As a result, dual-mode adapters must contain a level-shifting circuit which couples the signal lines to a DC source. The presence of this circuit places a limit on how quickly the adapter can operate, and therefore newer adapters are required for each higher speed added to the standard.
 * Unidirectional – Although the dual-mode standard specifies a method for DisplayPort sources to output DVI/HDMI signals using simple passive adapters, there is no counterpart standard to give DisplayPort displays the ability to receive DVI/HDMI input signals through passive adapters. As a result, DisplayPort displays can only receive native DisplayPort signals; any DVI or HDMI input signals must be converted to the DisplayPort format with an active conversion device. DVI and HDMI sources cannot be connected to DisplayPort displays using passive adapters.
 * Single-link DVI only – Since DisplayPort dual-mode operates by using the pins of the DisplayPort connector to send DVI/HDMI signals, the 20-pin DisplayPort connector can only produce a single-link DVI signal (which uses 19 pins). A dual-link DVI signal uses 25 pins, and is therefore impossible to transmit natively from a DisplayPort connector through a passive adapter. Dual-link DVI signals can only be produced by converting from native DisplayPort output signals with an active conversion device.
 * Unavailable on USB-C – The DisplayPort Alternate Mode specification for sending DisplayPort signals over a USB-C cable does not include support for the dual-mode protocol. As a result, DP-to-DVI and DP-to-HDMI passive adapters do not function when chained from a USB-C to DP adapter.

Multi-Stream Transport (MST)
Multi-Stream Transport is a feature first introduced in the DisplayPort1.2 standard. It allows multiple independent displays to be driven from a single DP port on the source devices by multiplexing several video streams into a single stream and sending it to a branch device, which demultiplexes the signal into the original streams. Branch devices are commonly found in the form of an MST hub, which plugs into a single DP input port and provides multiple outputs, but it can also be implemented on a display internally to provide a DP output port for daisy-chaining, effectively embedding a 2-port MST hub inside the display. Theoretically, up to 63 displays can be supported, but the combined data rate requirements of all the displays cannot exceed the limits of a single DP port (17.28Gbit/s for a DP1.2 port, or 25.92Gbit/s for a DP 1.3/1.4 port). In addition, the maximum number of links between the source and any device (i.e. the maximum length of a daisy-chain) is 7, and the maximum number of physical output ports on each branch device (such as a hub) is 7. With the release of MST, standard single-display operation has been retroactively named "SST" mode (Single-Stream Transport).

Daisy-chaining is a feature that must be specifically supported by each intermediary display; not all DisplayPort1.2 devices support it. Daisy-chaining requires a dedicated DisplayPort output port on the display. Standard DisplayPort input ports found on most displays cannot be used as a daisy-chain output. Only the last display in the daisy-chain does not need to support the feature specifically or have a DP output port. DisplayPort1.1 displays can also be connected to MST hubs, and can be part of a DisplayPort daisy-chain if it is the last display in the chain.

The host system's software also needs to support MST for hubs or daisy-chains to work. While Microsoft Windows environments have full support for it, Apple operating systems currently do not support MST hubs or DisplayPort daisy-chaining as of macOS 10.15 ("Catalina"). DisplayPort-to-DVI and DisplayPort-to-HDMI adapters/cables may or may not function from an MST output port; support for this depends on the specific device.

MST is supported by USB Type-C DisplayPort Alternate Mode, so standard DisplayPort daisy-chains and MST hubs do function from Type-C sources with a simple Type-C to DisplayPort adapter.

High dynamic range (HDR)
Support for HDR video was introduced in DisplayPort1.4. It implements the CTA 861.3 standard for transport of static HDR metadata in EDID.

Content protection
DisplayPort1.0 includes optional DPCP (DisplayPort Content Protection) from Philips, which uses 128-bit AES encryption. It also features full authentication and session key establishment. Each encryption session is independent, and it has an independent revocation system. This portion of the standard is licensed separately. It also adds the ability to verify the proximity of the receiver and transmitter, a technique intended to ensure users are not bypassing the content protection system to send data out to distant, unauthorized users.

DisplayPort1.1 added optional implementation of industry-standard 56-bit HDCP (High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection) revision 1.3, which requires separate licensing from the Digital Content Protection LLC.

DisplayPort1.3 added support for HDCP2.2, which is also used by HDMI2.0.

Cost
VESA, the creators of the DisplayPort standard, state that the standard is royalty-free to implement. However, in March 2015, MPEG LA issued a press release stating that a royalty rate of $0.20 per unit applies to DisplayPort products manufactured or sold in countries that are covered by one or more of the patents in the MPEG LA license pool, which includes patents from Hitachi Maxell, Philips, Lattice Semiconductor, Rambus, and Sony. In response, VESA updated their DisplayPort FAQ page with the following statement: "MPEG LA is making claims that DisplayPort implementation requires a license and a royalty payment. It is important to note that these are only CLAIMS. Whether these CLAIMS are relevant will likely be decided in a US court."

As of August 2019, VESA's official FAQ no longer contains a statement mentioning the MPEG LA royalty fees.

While VESA does not charge any per-device royalty fees, VESA requires membership for access to said standards. The minimum cost is presently $5,000 (or $10,000 depending on Annual Corporate Sales Revenue) annually.

Advantages over DVI, VGA and FPD-Link
In December 2010, several computer vendors and display makers including Intel, AMD, Dell, Lenovo, Samsung and LG announced they would begin phasing out FPD-Link, VGA, and DVI-I over the next few years, replacing them with DisplayPort and HDMI.

DisplayPort has several advantages over VGA, DVI, and FPD-Link.
 * Standard available to all VESA members with an extensible standard to help broad adoption
 * Fewer lanes with embedded self-clock, reduced EMI with data scrambling and spread spectrum mode
 * Based on a micro-packet protocol
 * Allows easy expansion of the standard with multiple data types
 * Flexible allocation of available bandwidth between audio and video
 * Multiple video streams over single physical connection (version 1.2)
 * Long-distance transmission over alternative physical media such as optical fiber (version 1.1a)
 * High-resolution displays and multiple displays with a single connection, via a hub or daisy-chaining
 * HBR2 mode with 17.28Gbit/s of effective video bandwidth allows four simultaneous 1080p60 displays (CEA-861 timings), two 2560 × 1600 × 30 bit @ 120Hz (CVT-R timings), or 4K UHD @ 60Hz
 * HBR3 mode with 25.92Gbit/s of effective video bandwidth, using CVT-R2 timings, allows eight simultaneous 1080p displays (1920 × 1080) @ 60Hz, stereoscopic 4K UHD (3840 × 2160) @ 120Hz, or 5120 × 2880 @ 60Hz each using 24 bit RGB, and up to 8K UHD (7680 × 4320) @ 60Hz using 4:2:0 subsampling
 * Designed to work for internal chip-to-chip communication
 * Aimed at replacing internal FPD-Link links to display panels with a unified link interface
 * Compatible with low-voltage signaling used with sub-micron CMOS fabrication
 * Can drive display panels directly, eliminating scaling and control circuits and allowing for cheaper and slimmer displays
 * Link training with adjustable amplitude and preemphasis adapts to differing cable lengths and signal quality
 * Reduced bandwidth transmission for 15 m cable, at least 1920 × 1080p @ 60Hz at 24 bits per pixel
 * Full bandwidth transmission for 3 m
 * High-speed auxiliary channel for DDC, EDID, MCCS, DPMS, HDCP, adapter identification etc. traffic
 * Can be used for transmitting bi-directional USB, touch-panel data, CEC, etc.
 * Self-latching connector

Comparison with HDMI
Although DisplayPort has much of the same functionality as HDMI, it is a complementary connection used in different scenarios. A dual-mode DisplayPort port can emit an HDMI signal via a passive adapter.

 * As of 2008, HDMI Licensing, LLC charged an annual fee of US$10,000 to each high-volume manufacturer and a per-unit royalty rate of US$0.04 to US$0.15. DisplayPort is royalty-free, but implementers thereof are not prevented from charging (royalty or otherwise) for that implementation.
 * DisplayPort 1.2 has more bandwidth at 21.6Gbit/s (17.28Gbit/s with overhead removed) as opposed to HDMI 2.0's 18Gbit/s (14.4Gbit/s with overhead removed).
 * DisplayPort 1.3 raises that to 32.4Gbit/s (25.92Gbit/s with overhead removed), and HDMI 2.1 raises that up to 48Gbit/s (42.67Gbit/s with overhead removed), adding an additional TMDS link in place of clock lane. DisplayPort also has the ability to share this bandwidth with multiple streams of audio and video to separate devices.
 * DisplayPort has historically had higher bandwidth than the HDMI standard available at the same time. The only exception is from HDMI 2.1 (2017) having higher transmission bandwidth @48Gbit/s than DisplayPort 1.3 (2014) @32.4Gbit/s. DisplayPort 2.0 (2019) retook transmission bandwidth superiority @80.0Gbit/s.
 * DisplayPort in native mode lacks some HDMI features such as Consumer Electronics Control (CEC) commands. The CEC bus allows linking multiple sources with a single display and controlling any of these devices from any remote. DisplayPort 1.3 added the possibility of transmitting CEC commands over the AUX channel From its very first version HDMI features CEC to support connecting multiple sources to a single display as is typical for a TV screen. The other way round, Multi-Stream Transport allows connecting multiple displays to a single computer source. This reflects the facts that HDMI originated from consumer electronics companies whereas DisplayPort is owned by VESA which started as an organization for computer standards.
 * HDMI uses unique Vendor-Specific Block structure, which allows for features such as additional color spaces. However, these features can be defined by CEA EDID extensions.
 * Both HDMI and DisplayPort have published specification for transmitting their signal over the USB-C connector. For more details, see.

Market share
Figures from IDC show that 5.1% of commercial desktops and 2.1% of commercial notebooks released in 2009 featured DisplayPort. The main factor behind this was the phase-out of VGA, and that both Intel and AMD planned to stop building products with FPD-Link by 2013. Nearly 70% of LCD monitors sold in August 2014 in the US, UK, Germany, Japan, and China were equipped with HDMI/DisplayPort technology, up 7.5% on the year, according to Digitimes Research. IHS Markit, an analytics firm, forecast that DisplayPort would surpass HDMI in 2019.

Mini DisplayPort
Mini DisplayPort (mDP) is a standard announced by Apple in the fourth quarter of 2008. Shortly after announcing Mini DisplayPort, Apple announced that it would license the connector technology with no fee. The following year, in early 2009, VESA announced that Mini DisplayPort would be included in the upcoming DisplayPort 1.2 specification. On 24 February 2011, Apple and Intel announced Thunderbolt, a successor to Mini DisplayPort which adds support for PCI Express data connections while maintaining backwards compatibility with Mini DisplayPort based peripherals.

Micro DisplayPort
Micro DisplayPort would have targeted systems that need ultra-compact connectors, such as phones, tablets and ultra-portable notebook computers. This standard would have been physically smaller than the currently available Mini DisplayPort connectors. The standard was expected to be released by Q2 2014.

DDM
Direct Drive Monitor (DDM) 1.0 standard was approved in December 2008. It allows for controller-less monitors where the display panel is directly driven by the DisplayPort signal, although the available resolutions and color depth are limited to two-lane operation.

Display Stream Compression
Display Stream Compression (DSC) is a VESA-developed video compression algorithm designed to enable increased display resolutions and frame rates over existing physical interfaces, and make devices smaller and lighter, with longer battery life.

eDP
Embedded DisplayPort (eDP) is a display panel interface standard for portable and embedded devices. It defines the signaling interface between graphics cards and integrated displays. The various revisions of eDP are based on existing DisplayPort standards. However, version numbers between the two standards are not interchangeable. For instance, eDP version 1.4 is based on DisplayPort 1.2, while eDP version 1.4a is based on DisplayPort 1.3. Embedded DisplayPort has displaced LVDS as the predominant panel interface in modern laptops and modern smartphones.

eDP 1.0 was adopted in December 2008. It included advanced power-saving features such as seamless refresh rate switching. Version 1.1 was approved in October 2009 followed by version 1.1a in November 2009. Version 1.2 was approved in May 2010 and includes DisplayPort 1.2 HBR2 data rates, 120Hz sequential color monitors, and a new display panel control protocol that works through the AUX channel. Version 1.3 was published in February 2011; it includes a new optional Panel Self-Refresh (PSR) feature developed to save system power and further extend battery life in portable PC systems. PSR mode allows the GPU to enter a power saving state in between frame updates by including framebuffer memory in the display panel controller. Version 1.4 was released in February 2013; it reduces power consumption through partial-frame updates in PSR mode, regional backlight control, lower interface voltages, and additional link rates; the auxiliary channel supports multi-touch panel data to accommodate different form factors. Version 1.4a was published in February 2015; the underlying DisplayPort version was updated to 1.3 in order to support HBR3 data rates, Display Stream Compression 1.1, Segmented Panel Displays, and partial updates for Panel Self-Refresh. Version 1.4b was published in October 2015; its protocol refinements and clarifications are intended to enable adoption of eDP 1.4b in devices by mid-2016. Version 1.5 was published in October 2021; adds new features and protocols, including enhanced support for Adaptive-Sync, that provide additional power savings and improved gaming and media playback performance.

iDP
Internal DisplayPort (iDP) is a standard that defines an internal link between a digital TV system on a chip controller and the display panel's timing controller. Version 1.0 was approved in April 2010. It aims to replace currently used internal FPD-Link lanes with a DisplayPort connection. iDP features a unique physical interface and protocols, which are not directly compatible with DisplayPort and are not applicable to external connection, however they enable very high resolution and refresh rates while providing simplicity and extensibility. iDP features a non-variable 2.7GHz clock and is nominally rated at 3.24Gbit/s per lane, with up to sixteen lanes in a bank, resulting in a six-fold decrease in wiring requirements over FPD-Link for a 1080p24 signal; other data rates are also possible. iDP was built with simplicity in mind so doesn't have an AUX channel, content protection, or multiple streams; it does however have frame sequential and line interleaved stereo 3D.

PDMI
Portable Digital Media Interface (PDMI) is an interconnection between docking stations/display devices and portable media players, which includes 2-lane DisplayPort v1.1a connection. It has been ratified in February 2010 as ANSI/CEA-2017-A.

wDP
Wireless DisplayPort (wDP) enables the bandwidth and feature set of DisplayPort 1.2 for cable-free applications operating in the 60GHz radio band. It was announced in November 2010 by WiGig Alliance and VESA as a cooperative effort.

SlimPort

SlimPort, a brand of Analogix products, complies with Mobility DisplayPort, also known as MyDP, which is an industry standard for a mobile audio/video Interface, providing connectivity from mobile devices to external displays and HDTVs. SlimPort implements the transmission of video up to 4K-UltraHD and up to eight channels of audio over the micro-USB connector to an external converter accessory or display device. SlimPort products support seamless connectivity to DisplayPort, HDMI and VGA displays. The MyDP standard was released in June 2012, and the first product to use SlimPort was Google's Nexus 4 smartphone. Some LG smartphones in LG G series also adopted SlimPort.

SlimPort is an alternative to Mobile High-Definition Link (MHL).

DisplayID
DisplayID is designed to replace the E-EDID standard. DisplayID features variable-length structures which encompass all existing EDID extensions as well as new extensions for 3D displays and embedded displays.

The latest version 1.3 (announced on 23 September 2013) adds enhanced support for tiled display topologies; it allows better identification of multiple video streams, and reports bezel size and locations. As of December 2013, many current 4K displays use a tiled topology, but lack a standard way to report to the video source which tile is left and which is right. These early 4K displays, for manufacturing reasons, typically use two 1920×2160 panels laminated together and are currently generally treated as multiple-monitor setups. DisplayID 1.3 also allows 8K display discovery, and has applications in stereo 3D, where multiple video streams are used.

DockPort
DockPort, formerly known as Lightning Bolt, is an extension to DisplayPort to include USB 3.0 data as well as power for charging portable devices from attached external displays. Originally developed by AMD and Texas Instruments, it has been announced as a VESA specification in 2014.

USB-C
On 22 September 2014, VESA published the DisplayPort Alternate Mode on USB Type-C Connector Standard, a specification on how to send DisplayPort signals over the newly released USB-C connector. One, two or all four of the differential pairs that USB uses for the SuperSpeed bus can be configured dynamically to be used for DisplayPort lanes. In the first two cases, the connector still can carry a full SuperSpeed signal; in the latter case, at least a non-SuperSpeed signal is available. The DisplayPort AUX channel is also supported over the two sideband signals over the same connection; furthermore, USB Power Delivery according to the newly expanded USB-PD 2.0 specification is possible at the same time. This makes the Type-C connector a strict superset of the use cases envisioned for DockPort, SlimPort, and Mini and Micro DisplayPort.

VirtualLink
VirtualLink is a proposal that allows the power, video, and data required to drive virtual reality headsets to be delivered over a single USB-C cable.

Products
Since DisplayPort's introduction in 2006, it has gained popularity within the computer industry and is featured on many graphics cards, displays, and notebook computers. Dell was the first company to introduce a consumer product with a DisplayPort connector, the Dell UltraSharp 3008WFP, which was released in January 2008. Soon after, AMD and Nvidia released products to support the technology. AMD included support in the Radeon HD 3000 series of graphics cards, and Nvidia first introduced support in the GeForce 9 series starting with the GeForce 9600 GT.

Later in 2008, Apple introduced several products featuring a Mini DisplayPort. The new connector – proprietary at the time – eventually became part of the DisplayPort standard, however Apple reserves the right to void the license should the licensee "commence an action for patent infringement against Apple". In 2009, AMD followed suit with their Radeon HD 5000 series of graphics cards, which featured the Mini DisplayPort on the Eyefinity versions in the series.

Nvidia launched a graphics card with 8 Mini DisplayPort outputs on 4 November 2015, called the NVS 810, which was intended for digital signage.

Nvidia revealed the GeForce GTX 1080, the world's first graphics card with DisplayPort 1.4 support on 6 May 2016. AMD followed with the Radeon RX 480 to support DisplayPort 1.3/1.4 on 29 June 2016. The Radeon RX 400 series will support DisplayPort 1.3 HBR and HDR10, dropping the DVI connector(s) in the reference board design.

In February 2017, VESA and Qualcomm announced that DisplayPort Alt Mode video transport will be integrated into the Snapdragon 835 mobile chipset, which powers smartphones, VR/AR head-mounted displays, IP cameras, tablets and mobile PCs.

Support for DisplayPort Alternate Mode over USB-C

Currently, DisplayPort is the most widely implemented alternate mode, and is used to provide video output on devices that do not have standard-size DisplayPort or HDMI ports, such as smartphones, tablets, and laptops. A USB-C multiport adapter converts the device's native video stream to DisplayPort/HDMI/VGA, allowing it to be displayed on an external display, such as a television set or computer monitor.

Examples of devices that support DisplayPort Alternate Mode over USB-C include: MacBook, Chromebook Pixel, Surface Book 2, Samsung Galaxy Tab S4, iPad Pro (3rd generation), iPhone 15/15 Pro, HTC 10/U Ultra/U11/U12+, Huawei Mate 10/20/30, LG V20/V30/V40*/V50, OnePlus 7 and newer, ROG Phone, Samsung Galaxy S8 and newer, Nintendo Switch, Sony Xperia 1/5 etc.

Participating companies
The following companies have participated in preparing the drafts of DisplayPort, eDP, iDP, DDM or DSC standards:

 * Agilent
 * Altera
 * AMD Graphics Product Group
 * Analogix
 * Apple
 * Astrodesign
 * BenQ
 * Broadcom Corporation
 * Chi Mei Optoelectronics
 * Chrontel
 * Dell
 * Display Labs
 * Foxconn Electronics
 * FuturePlus Systems
 * Genesis Microchip
 * Gigabyte Technology
 * Hardent
 * Hewlett-Packard
 * Hosiden
 * Hirose Electric Group
 * Intel
 * intoPIX
 * I-PEX
 * Integrated Device Technology
 * JAE Electronics
 * Kawasaki Microelectronics (K-Micro)
 * Keysight Technologies
 * Lenovo
 * LG Display
 * Luxtera
 * Molex
 * NEC
 * NVIDIA
 * NXP Semiconductors
 * Xi3 Corporation
 * Parade Technologies
 * Realtek Semiconductor
 * Samsung
 * SMK
 * STMicroelectronics
 * Synaptics Inc.
 * SyntheSys Research Inc.
 * Teledyne LeCroy (QuantumData)
 * Tektronix
 * Texas Instruments
 * TLi
 * Tyco Electronics
 * ViewSonic
 * VTM

The following companies have additionally announced their intention to implement DisplayPort, eDP or iDP:

 * Acer
 * ASRock
 * Biostar
 * Chroma
 * BlackBerry
 * Circuit Assembly
 * DataPro
 * Eizo
 * Fujitsu
 * Hall Research Technologies
 * ITE Tech.
 * Matrox Graphics
 * Micro-Star International
 * MStar Semiconductor
 * Novatek Microelectronics Corp.
 * Palit Microsystems Ltd.
 * Pioneer Corporation
 * S3 Graphics
 * Toshiba
 * Philips
 * Quantum Data
 * Sparkle Computer
 * Unigraf
 * Xitrix

title: DisplayPort


text:
Dollars & Sense

Dollars & Sense is a magazine focusing on economics from a progressive perspective, published by Dollars & Sense, Inc, which also publishes textbooks in the same genre.

Dollars & Sense describes itself as publishing "economic news and analysis, reports on economic justice activism, primers on economic topics, and critiques of the mainstream media's coverage of the economy."

Published since 1974 (it was originally a monthly; now it is bimonthly), it is edited by a collective of economists, journalists, and activists committed to the ideals of social justice and economic democracy.

It was initially sponsored by the Union for Radical Political Economics, but it is no longer affiliated with that organization. Today, the magazine is published by the independent Economic Affairs Bureau, Inc., a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation based in Boston. Circulation is about 7,000.

The magazine is aimed at academics, students, and activists in the economic justice, social justice and labor movements.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Dollars & Sense


text:
Universal polar stereographic coordinate system

The universal polar stereographic (UPS) coordinate system is used in conjunction with the universal transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinate system to locate positions on the surface of the Earth. Like the UTM coordinate system, the UPS coordinate system uses a metric-based cartesian grid laid out on a conformally projected surface. UPS covers the Earth's polar regions, specifically the areas north of 84°N and south of 80°S, which are not covered by the UTM grids, plus an additional 30 minutes of latitude extending into UTM grid to provide some overlap between the two systems.

In the polar regions, directions can become complicated, with all geographic north–south lines converging at the poles. The difference between UPS grid north and true north can therefore be anything up to 180°—in some places, grid north is true south, and vice versa. UPS grid north is arbitrarily defined as being along the prime meridian in the Antarctic and the 180th meridian in the Arctic; thus, east and west on the grids when moving directly away from the pole are along the 90°E and 90°W meridians respectively.

Projection system
As the name indicates, the UPS system uses a stereographic projection. Specifically, the projection used in the system is a secant version based on an elliptical model of the earth. The scale factor at each pole is adjusted to 0.994 so that the latitude of true scale is 81.11451786859362545° (about 81° 06' 52.3") North and South. The scale factor inside the regions at latitudes higher than this parallel is too small, whereas the regions at latitudes below this line have scale factors that are too large, reaching 1.0016 at 80° latitude.

The scale factor at the origin (the poles) is adjusted to minimize the overall distortion of scale within the mapped region. As with the Mercator projection, the region near the tangent (or secant) point on a Stereographic map remains very close to true scale for an angular distance of a few degrees. In the ellipsoidal model, a stereographic projection tangent to the pole has a scale factor of less than 1.003 at 84° latitude and 1.008 at 80° latitude. The adjustment of the scale factor in the UPS projection reduces the average scale distortion over the entire zone.


text: User talk:65.188.253.79

title: User talk:65.188.253.79


text: User talk:83.131.116.133

title: User talk:83.131.116.133


text:
Talk:Dillsboro, Indiana

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Dillsboro, Indiana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6HQu4Spqa?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.census.gov%2Fpopest%2Fdata%2Fcities%2Ftotals%2F2012%2FSUB-EST2012.html to http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2012/SUB-EST2012.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130911234518/http://factfinder2.census.gov to http://factfinder2.census.gov
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140903102005/http://www.postalhistory.com/postoffices.asp?task=display&state=IN&county=Dearborn to http://www.postalhistory.com/postoffices.asp?task=display&state=IN&county=Dearborn
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6YSasqtfX?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.census.gov%2Fprod%2Fwww%2Fdecennial.html to http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:53, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dillsboro, Indiana


text:
The Lonely (British Sea Power song)

"The Lonely" is a song by British Sea Power. The song was the group's third single and their second on Rough Trade. It was their first single to garner much press coverage and resulted in a chart position. Unusually, the nominal A-side actually featured as the flipside on both versions. The main position is taken by "The Spirit of St. Louis", a tale of Charles Lindbergh's flight across the Atlantic. This is still regularly performed live, despite it only appearing on this release. The title track was written as a tribute to Geoff Goddard, a friend of the band who wrote the 1960s number-one single, "Johnny Remember Me".

The single reached number 76 on the UK Singles Chart.

CD
(RTRADESCD048)
 * 1) "The Spirit of St. Louis" (Yan/BSP) – 3:56
 * 2) "The Lonely" (Yan/BSP) – 5:03
 * 3) "No Red Indian" (Hamilton/BSP) – 3:54

7" Vinyl
(RTRADES048)
 * 1) "The Spirit of St. Louis" (Yan/BSP) – 3:56
 * 2) "The Lonely" (Yan/BSP) – 5:03

title: The Lonely (British Sea Power song)


text:
CGI Inc.

CGI Inc. (abbreviation of Consultants to Government and Industry Incorporated ) is a Canadian multinational information technology consulting and Software Development company headquartered in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. CGI went public in 1986 with a primary listing on the Toronto Stock Exchange. CGI is also a constituent of the S&P/TSX 60 and has a secondary listing on the New York Stock Exchange.

As of 2023, CGI is based in 40+ countries with around 400 offices world wide with 91,000+ employees. CGI mainly works in application services, business consulting, business process Management, IT infrastructure services, IT outsourcing services, and systems integration services.

1970s-1980s: Early years
CGI Inc. was founded as an IT consulting company on June 15, 1976, in Quebec City, Québec, by Serge Godin. Within several months he was joined by co-founder André Imbeau from Quebec City. They initially ran the business from Godin's basement with a single phone. Starting with one client, as the company grew in size the co-founders moved to Montreal, and by the end of their first year they had generated $138,000 in revenue. While CGI stands for "Conseillers en gestion et informatique" in French (which translates to "consultants in management and information technology"), the official English meaning would later become "Consultants to Government and Industry." In later years the company began to go to market as simply CGI.

Throughout the 1970s, CGI focused on the information technology (IT) services market. Later in the 1970s, CGI branched into IT outsourcing. CGI's annual revenue in 1986 was $25 million, and the same year CGI went public with an initial public offering (IPO).

1990s: Doubling in size
CGI earned ISO 9001 certification for their "project management framework" in 1994, and in doing so became the first IT consulting firm in North America to comply with the ISO quality standard. In 1995, CGI entered into a commercial alliance with the large telecommunications company Bell Canada, with Bell Canada purchasing CGI shares then valued at $18.4 million. By the end of 1996, CGI's annual revenue was $122 million. In 1997, CGI acquired the company CDSL Holdings Limited (CDSL). After the acquisition, CGI's employees in both Canada and internationally numbered 2,500. In 1998 CGI acquired the Canadian company Bell Sygma, a Bell Canada subsidiary, which almost doubled CGI's size.

2000s: Expansion into international markets
CGI acquired IMRGlobal in 2001 for $438 million, which added "global delivery options" for CGI. In 2003, the Canadian tech company Cognicase was bought out by CGI for US$221 million, and at the end of 2003 CGI had annual sales of $1.85 billion. In 2004, CGI purchased the majority of American Management Systems (AMS) for $858 million. As of late 2004, CGI was the world's eighth largest independent provider of information technology services.

CGI co-founder Serge Godin stepped aside as CEO in 2006, taking the new position of executive chairman of the board and appointing as new CEO Michael Roach. Annual revenue at CGI was $3.5 billion by the fiscal end of 2006. That same year, CGI became one of four primary Recovery Audit Contractors in the US, with responsibilities to audit region B. At the end of 2007, CGI had a backlog worth $12.04 billion and an annual revenue of $3.7 billion, employing around 26,500 people.

2010-2012: Second doubling in size
In 2010, CGI acquired Stanley, Inc. for an enterprise value of approximately $1.07 billion. The deal came close to doubling CGI's presence in the United States and expanded CGI into defense and intelligence contracts. In 2010, CGI was included in the Forbes Global 2000 ranking of the 2,000 largest public companies in the world. As of 2011, there were 31,000 CGI employees in 125 offices worldwide and 89% of professionals at CGI also owned company shares.

In 2012, CGI acquired the UK-based computer services company Logica for £1.7 billion (CAN$2.7 billion) in cash. The acquisition raised the number of CGI's staff from 31,000 to 68,000, and CGI became the fifth largest independent business processes and IT services company in the world. It also made CGI the biggest tech firm in Canada. In 2012, CGI won a $143 million contract to provide operational support for the Army's training elements, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence, and the United States Army Training and Doctrine Command.

2013-2015: Contract work
At the time, CGI's train occupancy mobile app,, was being used by several train companies and institutions in Europe. In February 2013, the independent analyst firm Verdantix published a report comparing technology consulting and systems integration firms' ability to build efficient renewable energy management systems. The report named CGI as No. 4 on the "overall capabilities" score. Continuing to work in the financial sector, CGI was rated as a "major contender" by Everest Group in a 2013 PEAK Matrix study looking at IT outsourcing capital markets.

In 2011, CGI was one of many contractors involved in establishing a new federal health insurance marketplace, and HealthCare.gov was launched in 2013. CGI was also contracted to help develop health insurance marketplaces for some state governments.

In 2014, CGI had contracts with federal businesses such as Defense Information Services Agency, visa processing in China, and the Coast Guard and Department of Homeland Security. CGI also worked with state governments, for example the California Enterprise Data to Revenue (EDR) Project for the California Franchise Tax Board. In 2014, The Globe and Mail reported that CGI was operating ten security centers, from which 1,400 CGI employees monitor "data traffic for an undisclosed number of customers" that include the Canadian Payments Association, the National Bank of Canada, and about forty Canadian government departments.

By 2014, CGI had been working with the European space industry for years, and had developed software that helps support the missions of over 200 individual satellites. CGI had also created the Constellation Control Facility that control's the Galileo Commercial Service's 30 satellites, and software for the first satellite in the world with e-sail (electric solar wind sail). In 2014, CGI was awarded a new contract by Inmarsat, the safety communications provider for 98% of airlines. In 2014, 16% of CGI's revenue came from software.

In 2014, Canadian Business named Michael Roach, then CEO of CGI, the most innovative CEO of the Canada of the year. Fiscal revenue by the end of 2014 was C$10.5 billion, and in the first quarter of 2015, CGI had revenues of $2.54 billion.

2016-present: Third CEO

As of 2016, CGI ranked number 955 on the Forbes Global 2000. At the time, CGI had assets worth C$20.9 billion, annual sales of $10.7 billion, and a market value of $9.6 billion.

In 2016, CGI had contracts with the British Columbia Ministry of Health, the U.S. Navy to work on their NAVSUP Business Systems Center, the Swedish social insurance agency, Sears Canada, the Queensland government, among others.

In 2016, George D. Schindler succeeded Michael Roach as the third CEO in CGI's history.

In 2019, The Wall Street Journal indicated CGI was part of the Chinese APT10 group's Operation Cloud Hopper hack, which exposed companies' data from 2013 to 2017. The first known target was Rio Tinto, who was accessed through CGI's managed cloud.

Corporate affairs
CGI originally stood for "Conseillers en gestion et informatique" (translated to English: "Consultants on management and information systems"). More recently, in English speaking countries it is taken to stand for "Consultants to Government and Industries".

Markets and corporate structure
CGI has an international client base, with large institutional clients in a wide array of industries and markets. The United States made up 29% of their client base as of March 2015, while Canada was the second-highest percentage at 15%. The majority of CGI's remaining contracts were in Europe (around 40%), with 15% in the rest of the world.

CGI has a primary listing on the Toronto Stock Exchange and is a constituent of the S&P/TSX 60. It has a secondary listing on the New York Stock Exchange. As of March 2015, CGI made 42% of its revenue through government contracts.

CGI Federal
CGI Federal is a wholly owned subsidiary of CGI Inc. CGI Federal has partnered with U.S. federal agencies to provide IT services in defense, diplomacy, intelligence, healthcare, environment, homeland security, justice, treasury and more. CGI Federal has annual revenue exceeding US$1 billion.

In 2018, CGI Federal opened an Innovation Center in Arlington, Virginia, to provide a collaboration space for agency and CGI experts to explore the potential of new technologies.

Products and services
Originally CGI focused its products and services on IT consulting, and the company later branched into outsourcing, software development, and systems integration, among other industries. At the end of 2014, CGI earned 52% of its revenue from providing outsourcing services (specifically through IT services and to a lesser degree, business process services) and 48% of its revenue from systems integration and consulting. Services CGI supplies in relation to business consulting include business intelligence, business transformation, change management, cyber security, CIO advisory services, digital enterprise, as well as other industry-specific services. In relation to business process services, CGI offers customer service and billing, payment services, enterprise services, collections, engineering and logistics, document and data services, and a BPS service launch. CGI provides full IT outsourcing services. The following is an overview of services provided by CGI as of 2015: CGI also develops products and services for markets such as telecommunications, health, manufacturing, oil and gas, posts and logistics, retail and consumer services, transportation, and utilities. Clients include both private entities and central governments, state, provincial and local governments, and government departments dealing with defense, intelligence, space, health, human services, public safety, justice, tax, revenue and collections.
 * Application services
 * Business consulting
 * Business process services
 * Infrastructure services
 * IT outsourcing services
 * Systems integration services

Awards
CGI Federal was ranked 26th on the 2018 Washington Technology Top 100, and 72nd on the 2019 Bloomberg Government 200 (BGOV200). The company also was a finalist for the 2018 Greater Washington Government Contractor Awards, Contractor of the Year ($300 million+), and a 2017 ACT-IACT Igniting Innovation Award.

A number of CGI Federal executives have been recognized for leadership in their sectors, including: Tim Hurlebaus, president: 2019 Wash100, 2018 Fed100 and GovCon 2018 Executive of the Year finalist; Stephanie Mango, senior vice president: 2018 Pinnacle Awards, National Security Executive of the Year and 2018 Top 10 Executives to Watch In National Security; Malcolm Harden, vice president: 2019 Fed100; and Steve Soussa, senior vice president: 2018 Top 10 Health Care Leaders to Watch.

Controversies
CGI faced notable challenges with its involvement in the HealthCare.gov website for the U.S. government. As reported by Vanity Fair, CGI's work on the site frustrated government officials due to missed deadlines, with the CMS's chief operating officer stating, "If we could fire them, we would." The Washington Post further highlighted that the company's previous project controversies were not taken into account when awarding the healthcare.gov contract. Additionally, Reuters documented the U.S. government's decision to part ways with CGI after the site "failed to work when it launched in October" and experienced ongoing issues, further igniting political debates.

Separately, in Ontario, CGI encountered issues with an online medical registry project. The Washington Examiner reported that eHealth Ontario, an Ontario provincial agency, decided to cancel CGI Group’s $46.2 million contract related to the registry due to being 14 months behind schedule. Furthermore, the contract was terminated, and a group of other IT companies successfully replicated the registry, rendering CGI's project obsolete. Consequently, due to contract stipulations requiring payment only upon satisfactory delivery, the province refused to pay CGI.

In Hawaii, the Affordable Care Act's implementation via the Hawaii Health Connector faced significant obstacles, leading to the resignation of its executive director, Coral Andrews. The Hawaii Health Connector had secured $200 million in federal funding for its establishment, with CGI Group developing its website at a cost of $53 million. However, the website's launch on Oct. 1 encountered severe technical issues, causing user frustrations due to site crashes and inaccessibility. Despite expectations from officials, including Gov. Neil Abercrombie, for a large enrollment, as of Nov. 15, only 257 individuals successfully secured healthcare through the platform. Senate President Donna Mercado Kim had previously cautioned against employing CGI Group, referencing their involvement with the problematic Hawaii state tax department website.

CGI, who was instrumental in developing Hawaii's computerized tax system and a disease surveillance system, has also come under scrutiny from that state's auditor. The system installed by CGI has been credited with a $66 million increase in tax collections since 2008. The state Legislature initiated an audit following concerns about the $25 million contract awarded to CGI for the delinquent tax system and several other contracts. These concerns were spurred by suspicions of improprieties in the contract award process and the modification of an original contract in CGI's favor. The adjusted agreement appeared more beneficial to CGI than to Hawaii, according to House Finance Chairman Marcus Oshiro. The audit was influenced by claims from a former tax research officer, Tu Duc Pham, who suggested that the revised agreement with CGI unduly favored the company. Besides the tax department, the Health Department's ties with CGI are also being evaluated due to noncompetitive contracts awarded to the firm. Overall, CGI has received contracts amounting to approximately $90 million from Hawaii's Tax and Health departments since 1999, with a notable portion being awarded without competitive bidding.

title: CGI Inc.


text:
Presidio of Santa Barbara

El Presidio Real de Santa Bárbara, also known as the Royal Presidio of Santa Barbara, is a former military installation in Santa Barbara, California, United States. The presidio was built by Spain in 1782, with the mission of defending the Second Military District in California. In modern times, the Presidio serves as a significant tourist attraction, museum and an active archaeological site as part of El Presidio de Santa Barbara State Historic Park.

The park contains an original adobe structure called El Cuartel, which is the second oldest surviving building in California; only the chapel at Mission San Juan Capistrano, known as "Father Junípero Serra's Church", is older. The Presidio of Santa Barbara has the distinction of being the last military outpost built by Spain in the New World. The Presidio became a California Historical Landmark in 1958 and was listed on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places in 1973.

Contemporary setting and use
The current El Presidio de Santa Barbara State Historic Park site sits between Anacapa and Garden Street on East Canon Perdido Street in downtown Santa Barbara. The main portion of the site is across the street from the Santa Barbara city Post Office, and is about two blocks from city hall, De la Guerra Plaza and two other museums, the Santa Barbara Historical Museum and the Casa de la Guerra and includes a reconstructed quadrangle with soldiers' quarters and a chapel.

Only two portions of the original presidio quadrangle survive to this day: a remnant of the Cañedo Adobe, named for José María Cañedo, the Soldado de Cuera to whom it was deeded in lieu of back pay when the Presidio fell to inactivity, and the remnants of a two-room soldiers quarters, called El Cuartel. The Cañedo Adobe is currently serving as the visitor's center for the state park, and El Cuartel is largely unmodified. The site administrator, the Santa Barbara Trust for Historic Preservation (SBTHP), reconstructed the rest of the site, with the most recent construction—two rooms in the northwest corner of the site—finished in May 2006. The reconstruction is ongoing, with the more recent construction of two more rooms in the northwest corner.

The Presidio Chapel and courtyard were also completed during the construction of the quadrangle. The chapel is occasionally used for civic events such as musical concerts and lectures. Although not a canonical Roman Catholic oratory, Roman Catholic weddings are occasionally performed in the chapel with the permission of the local Roman Catholic Santa Barbara Pastoral Regional bishop.

History
The site of the Presidio was chosen by Felipe de Neve, the fourth governor of Las Californias. Perceiving that the coast at Santa Barbara was vulnerable to attack, he located a spot near a harbor which was sheltered from severe storms. In addition, there was an ample supply of both building materials and water nearby. Construction began on April 21, 1782, and Padre Junípero Serra blessed the site. By the next year, a temporary facility had been completed, and a wheat field planted by the local Chumash Indians of Chief Yanonalit. The early Presidio consisted of mud and brush walls around a quadrangle 330 feet on a side. The post had 61 officers and men in 1783.

The first comandante, José Francisco Ortega, planned the fortifications and irrigation works. He obtained livestock for the presidio from Mission San Buenaventura, established orchards, and began large-scale farming. In 1784, Felipe de Goicoechea took over as comandante, supervising construction of the fortifications and living quarters for the soldiers and their families. Two years later, construction of the nearby Mission Santa Barbara began in 1786. The pueblo or town of Santa Barbara developed around the Presidio, which offered protection for the residents. The chapel in the Presidio was the primary place of worship for the residents of early Santa Barbara, until its destruction by the 1857 Fort Tejon earthquake. The mission, located a mile and a half inland, was mainly intended for use by the native Chumash (Barbareño) neophytes after their conversion to Catholicism.

The Presidio was built to standard plans for a Spanish colonial military headquarters, using locally available materials, so the buildings forming the outer square were constructed with thick, solid adobe outer walls. The main gate opened into an open parade ground/plaza in the center of the square. The chapel stood at the center of the back of the square, facing the gate across the plaza. While it was never attacked by a strong military force during its sixty years of operation, the Presidio was subject to the assaults of nature. Several devastating earthquakes in the early 19th century destroyed much of the structure.

In 1855 the Presidio Chapel grew into the Apostolic College of Our Lady of Sorrows, which soon became Our Lady of Sorrows Church at the corner of Figueroa and State Streets, and then at the corner of Anacapa and Sola streets in 1929. However, both still stand separately as vibrant churches of a richly Catholic history.

Mexican–American War
At the time of the Mexican–American War in Alta California, very little of the fortress remained in usable condition, and on December 27, 1846, John C. Frémont ascended San Marcos Pass during rainy weather and came up on the Presidio and the town from behind. The Presidio surrendered without a fight, as the garrison was far south in the Pueblo de Los Angeles. Frémont had heard that the Mexican army was lying in ambush for him at Gaviota Pass, the only other sensible route over the mountains at that time, and had crossed the difficult muddy track on San Marcos Pass to outflank them, but this move turned out not to have been necessary. Mexican General Andrés Pico later surrendered his force to Frémont, recognizing that the war was lost.

Preservation
In 1963, the Santa Barbara Trust for Historic Preservation (SBTHP) was founded, with the primary mission of restoring the Presidio. In 1966, the land on which the Presidio is located became a State Historic Park. On December 27, 2006, the SBTHP renewed their ongoing agreement with the California State Parks Department to manage the Presidio. Work on the restoration is currently taking place. On November 26, 1973, the Presidio of Santa Barbara was added to the U.S. National Register of Historic Places.

The Presidio of Santa Barbara is a participating site of the Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail, a National Park Service area in the United States National Trails System.

title: Presidio of Santa Barbara


text:
User talk:Concavelenz

Thanks for taking a minute to drop me a note. Concavelenz 22:28, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

My sandbox User_talk:Concavelenz/sandbox

Nomination of XNUMBERS for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article XNUMBERS is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/XNUMBERS until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Codename Lisa (talk) 09:17, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

title: User talk:Concavelenz


text: Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Index

title: Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics/Index


text:
Daniel McLean (Canadian politician)

Lt.-Col. Daniel McLean (January 4, 1868 – March 2, 1950 ) was a politician in Manitoba, Canada. He served in the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba from 1914 to 1915, and later served as the 32nd Mayor of Winnipeg for two years. McLean was a member of the Conservative Party.

Biography
McLean was born in the Scotch Block of Esquesing Township, Halton County, Ontario, the son of Mr. G. McLean, and was educated at public schools in Georgetown. McLean came to Manitoba in 1892. In 1895, he married A. Blanchard. He worked as a real estate broker and farmer, and served as president of McLean and Grisdale Ltd. He was also appointed Lieutenant-Colonel of the 106th Regiment (Winnipeg Light Infantry) on April 1, 1912. In religion, McLean was a Presbyterian.

McLean was an alderman in Winnipeg from 1907 to 1910, and a city controller from 1913 to 1914. He was elected to the Manitoba legislature in the 1914 provincial election, defeating Liberal candidate Robert Newton Lowery and Social Democrat Herman Saltzmann in Winnipeg North "B". The Conservatives won a majority government in this election, and McLean served as a backbench supporter of Rodmond Roblin's administration.

In 1915, the Roblin administration was forced to resign from office after a report commissioned by the Lieutenant Governor found the government guilty of corruption in the tendering of contracts for new legislative buildings. A new election was called, which the Liberals won in a landslide. McLean did not seek re-election.

During World War I, McLean served overseas as commander of the 101st Battalion of the Canadian Expeditionary Force. From 1918 to 1919, he served on Headquarters Staff for Military Division No. 10. From 1919 to 1921, he was commander of the 10th Battalion (Canadians), CEF.

He attempted to return to the legislature in the 1922 provincial election. By this time, the city of Winnipeg had been re-designed as a single ten-member constituency, with members chosen by a single transferable ballot. McLean finished in 24th place on the first count with 515 votes, and was eliminated on the twenty-first count.

He served as mayor of Winnipeg in 1928–29, succeeding fellow Conservative Ralph Webb. He was defeated by Webb when he ran for reelection as mayor for 1930.

He died in Winnipeg at the age of 82.

title: Daniel McLean (Canadian politician)


text:
Talk:Moores Hill, Indiana

Copyright Double-check
Text for the "History" section was taken from a governmental website. I believe it falls under the "open" or "fair use" copyright requirements. Dearborn County Waarmstr 21:17, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Moores Hill, Indiana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051202100956/http://www.evansville.edu/150/history.asp?version=1 to http://www.evansville.edu/150/history.asp?version=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:38, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Moores Hill, Indiana


text:
Talk:St. Leon, Indiana

Saint Leon redirect
this has to become a redirect; there's Arthur Saint-Leon, St. Leon (novel), St. Leon, Manitoba, Saint Leon Hot Springs, British Columbia (aka St. Leon), St.-Pol-de-Leon, Finistere, France, and St.-Leon, Quebec. At least; never mind the namesake St. Leo wherever his article is at....Skookum1 (talk) 20:10, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * See this though I'll probably wind up making the necessary disambig myself later this evening, as it should be listed on Saint Leo but it's not appropriate at the moment as only directing to the Indiana St. Leon.....Skookum1 (talk) 20:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Fun Facts
Erm... Where did the underground secret corn lab info come from?. Kupohunter 14:53, 11 October 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.139.126.67 (talk)

 * From here. I've deleted it. —Tim Pierce (talk) 18:57, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:St. Leon, Indiana


text: Talk:West Harrison, Indiana

title: Talk:West Harrison, Indiana


text: User talk:Jan.coemans

title: User talk:Jan.coemans


text:
Talk:Telephoto lens

Telephoto / Zoom
I have placed a request on zoom lens to merge into this article. There is duplication between this article and zoom lens. I think the two articles should be combined. I think a zoom lens should be a subcategory of telephoto lens, as the distinction is basically a zoom lens has a varying focal length. The issues as to what a focal length is, what an angle of view is, and how these things are related are common to both. Furthermore, the artistic aspects of using a telephoto and zoom to me seem to be the same. Bottom line, there is information in the zoom article that relates to telephoto and vice versa. --Lenehey 22:32, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

NO ! It's a common confusion. A telephoto is not a zoom. And the artistic aspects of using a telephoto and zoom aren't the same especialy if we extend the topic to the use of zoom in movies and video. There's a (very incomplete BTW) article about photographic lenses another, another about wide-angle lenses, another about normal lenses, another about zoom lenses and I think it should stay like this. Ericd 21:40, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Correction
There seems to be a little bit of confusion in this article. It starts by saying that a telephoto lens is any lens with a focal length significantly longer than the focal length of a normal lens but then saying that a telephoto lens must include a telephoto group.

I think the article needs clarifying. Specifically, I think these points need to be made:

1. A lens with a focal length significantly longer than the focal length of a normal lens is a long lens.

2. A telephoto lens is an optical design that has the property of allowing the lens to be physically shorter than the focal length would suggest. A telephoto lens need not be a long lens but generally is.

3. The term telephoto is commonly misused to describe any long lens.

Stephen Short 20:10, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

The page, in general is very confused between lenses that are telephoto and lenses that are just long. The introduction says that a tele lens must have a telephoto group but everything from the Effects section onwards applies equally well to any long lens, telephoto or not. Would it not be better to split this article into two pages, one for 'long lens' (talking about what a long lens is, what effects they have and when they're used) and one for 'telephoto lens' (explaining that it's a common long lens design)?

Dricherby 12:59, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Clear definition
This article could use a sentence or two before where it currently starts or a bit of rewording. It would be more helpful to include a short (if somewhat imprecise) definition of what a telephoto lens is. To someone just coming in, the first paragraph's focus on what isn't telephoto will probably not be entirely helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.227.66.222 (talk • contribs)
 * AMEN BROTHER! All I wanted to know was what it did, not how it did it in excruciating technical detail.  One simple sentence, then you can get to the technobabble. Scottanon (talk) 21:50, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

 * I agree, the lede lacks a basic defintion. Just one sentence that states, "Telephoto lenses are typically used for..." or "Photographers prefer telephoto lenses when..." would be very helpful.  Bms4880 (talk) 22:20, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Argumentative wording about long vs telephoto
I'm copying this here since the anonymous user making recent changes is at a new IP address and I didn't want it being lost on some random anonymous talk page.

About your (anonymous) edits - While what you are stating is fact, your wording is argumentative. Wikipedia is about informing people, not talking down to them or showing them that you're "right". Very good, you know that a telephoto lens must technically have a "telephoto group" of lenses in it. The article already stated that, no need to make it so prominent. I assume most modern long-focal-length lenses are telephoto anyway, simply for practical reasons. So there's little need to "correct" people in the introduction. --Imroy 19:12, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Instead of complaining about it, why didn't you try to contribute something better, rather than just revert the factually incorrect version. The entry didn't even mention the telephoto group until half way through, and then only in passing, leaving the reader with the impression that any long focus lens is a telephoto lens, unless he read far enough and made the conection.  It needs to be prominent, because that is the essential feature of the telephoto lens. 86.134.123.38 13:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

 * If you must know, I did start editing your contribution, moving the "correction" to the second paragraph and also breaking the article up into sections. But I ditched it because I was tired at the time. I'll have another look at it soon and see what I can do. And if you look at the diff, you'll see that I did not simply revert your previous edits, I did try to incorporate some of your contribution. --Imroy 14:18, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Fair comment. I had assumed you had simply reverted it, because that is what the change description said. 86.134.123.38 15:09, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

 * It would help to clarify how to measure
 * How to demonstrate that a particular lens is physically shorter than its focal length would help, it may even clarify the potential confusion about Catadioptric design.
 * For example you don't measure from the front to the lens mount, the lens mount may be any distance from the focal point (large format, bellows mounted lenses are obvious examples). The Angénieux retrofocus article explains retrofocus clearly so it should be easy to explain telephoto clearly too.

 * Bill burk (talk) 04:06, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

 * It may even help to describe Wide Angle designs
 * Like telephoto designs are used to make a lens physically shorter, wide angle lenses are sometimes designed to make the lens physically longer than their focal length. 35mm SLR cameras need the lens farther from the film plane to make room for the mirror box. I think telling both stories in the same article could help people grasp the concept, and it could be defined in terms of light path distortion to solve specific problems.

 * While Catadioptric lens designs don't distort the path, they fold it. Bill burk (talk) 04:06, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Non-Telephoto Catadioptrics?
However, lenses incorporating mirrors are not necessarily of telephoto design. Is there any particular citation to prove this statment? (other than people saying that there are some?) 69.72.7.119 04:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

 * There are some medium focal length mirror 'lenses' around where the focal length is around twice the pysical length of the assembly (and I have one sitting in front of me - it's a 500mm mirror and it's 265mm long (excluding mount)). This is characteristic of a Schmidt design and obviously does not require any telephoto elements to achieve this (though I have no intention of dismantling this one to check).  This could be achieved with just 2 mirrors and nothing else, but there are some refractive surfaces in the glass elements which are undoubtedly to correct abberations from the mirrors.  Many older short (relatively) focal length (mirror) 'lenses' fall into this category, but virtually all modern 500mm lenses are of refractive design.  Much longer focal length mirrors do have telephoto elements in them to keep them a respectable size.

 * I B Wright 09:54, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

 * The Schmidt and the Maksutov optical system (see Catadioptrics) both uses a convex secondary mirror to bounce the light through the primary. That convex secondary is the "telephoto group"--- it extends the light cone beyond the focal legth of the primary "mirror". I have not seen any Catadioptric lenses that are not Schmidts or Maksutovs. If there is a non-telephoto lens out there it would probably be a "flat secondary" Schmidt... which could exist although i have never seen one... but I think the original statment would need a citation of such a beast. Mr Floating IP 69.72.7.207 13:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Thumbnail focus
Why do some of the thumbnail images appear to be out-of-focus? Does that happen during the reduction? I don't know too much about digital manipulation. 66.57.225.77 04:00, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Long lenses
The opening paragraph of this article specifficaly excludes "Long Lenses". Why does Long lens redirect here? If something is not included in a definition should not be redirected and maybe even have its own article?69.72.7.39 16:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

 * The term "long lens" is almost always used to mean "long-focal-length lens". Most long lenses are telephoto lenses.  Furthermore, while the formal definition of telephoto excludes lenses that aren't shortened by a telephoto optical design, the informal use covers ALL long lenses. Dicklyon 19:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Without a Doubt...
This is one of the most uninformed articles written on Wikipedia, through and through. Factual inconsistencies, falsehoods and random made-up BS. This article doesn't even deserve to be panned for its grammatical butchering because the content is so awful. Evil Prince 01:14, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Picture caption not correct?
The photo shows a Beroflex 500/8 lens and the captions state it is not a telephoto lens. I own this lens and it is definitely constructed as a telephoto lens according to the description in the article. It is also less than 500mm long. It is rather long compared to modern lenses, but still a telephoto construction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.56.141.46 (talk) 22:09, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

 * In any case what would be the point of illustrating an article on telephoto lenses with a picture of a lens that isn't a telephoto? 83.104.249.240 (talk) 03:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Article cleanup
Cleaned up article for style, WP:MOSBEGIN, WP:JARGON, and general referencing. Some images did not seem to fit WP:IMAGE per: not being informative, or even readable at thumbnail. Also moved some material off to Long focus lens since reference, article content, and most editors on this page point to the telephoto being a specific construction/sub-type of a long focus lens. The prose style is still a little teach-ie. The added paragraphs on Alexander McKay look to be trivia since they have no reference as to if what he did was notable in any way, i.e a historic first? a well published pathfinder?, etc. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 20:50, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Animals
Is there no mention of this type of lens in animals?--91.104.230.118 (talk) 20:59, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No.  Velella  Velella Talk 22:17, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Alexander McKay photos of the Vjestnik
Would be really interesting to see them – I guess there are no digital scans available. What was the focal length of his constructions? Paul Pot (talk) 23:30, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Telephoto lens


text:
Talk:Milford, Decatur County, Indiana

Removed claim
I have removed the following claim from this page:

"Prior to its dissolution as a town, Milford had the dubious distinction of having the smallest population of any incorporated community in the State of Indiana."

Try telling the folks of the town of New Amsterdam this. Evking22 (talk) 23:13, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Milford, Decatur County, Indiana