At the IPP telecon today, 5 issues were raised about the "media-coll" Job
Template attribute that is in the PWG Production Printing Extensions
document reviewed last week for the first time (though it has been an IPP
document for a year). See:
ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/new_PPE/pwg-ipp-prod-print-set1-000605.doc,
.pdf
Send comments to both the ipp at pwg.org and pwg-ipp at pwg.org on these 5 issues,
since this issue relates to two existing IETF RFCs (1759 and 2534) as well
as IPP and Production Printing. Also today's desktop printing systems pass
media attributes, such as size, color, type, and weight.
ISSUE 01: Should "media-col" be moved to an IETF document, instead of a PWG
document since it is not limited to Production Printing? There are two
other IETF standards on this subject: RFC 1759 (Printer MIB) and RFC 2534
(Media Features for Display, Print, and FAX).
ISSUE 02: While describing that "media-weight-english" has been removed, it
was suggested that we should have a "media-info" (text(127)) which is just a
free form description of the medium, just like we have "printer-info"
(text(127)) for the Printer object. Ok to add?
ISSUE 03: We don't have a way to indicate that the media is a envelope. The
two above mentioned standards have a media-type that has the following
values which we should/could align with:
RFC1759 (and new Draft Printer MIB):
stationery Separately cut sheets of an opaque
material
transparency Separately cut sheets of a transparent
material
envelope Envelopes that can be used for
conventional mailing purposes
envelope-plain Envelopes that are not preprinted and
have no windows
envelope-window Envelopes that have windows for
addressing purposes
continuous-long Continuously connected sheets of an
opaque material connected along the
long edge
continuous-short Continuously connected sheets of an
opaque material connected along the
short edge
tab-stock Media with tabs
multi-part-form Form medium composed of multiple layers
not pre-attached to one another; each
sheet may be drawn separately from an
input source
labels Label stock
multi-layer Form medium composed of multiple layers
which are pre-attached to one another;
e.g., for use with impact printers.
The Internet FAX folks in RFC 2534 (Media Features for Display, Print, and
FAX) have for the ua-media feature tag:
screen A refreshable display
screen-paged a refreshable display which cannot scroll
stationery Separately cut sheets of an opaque material
transparency Separately cut sheets of a transparent material
envelope Envelopes that can be used for conventional
mailing purposes
envelope-plain Envelopes that are not preprinted and have no
windows
continuous Continuously connected sheets of an opaque
material
So they borrowed from the Printer MIB, added 'screen', and 'screen-paged',
combined 'continuous-long' and 'continuous-short' into 'continuous', and
dropped: 'envelope-window', 'tab-stock', 'multi-part-form', 'labels', and
'multi-layer'.
The "media-col" collection has the following member attributes that
duplicate some of these values with more specific values:
media-opacity (type3 keyword) - covers 'stationery' vs.
'transparency'
media-tabs (type3 keyword) - covers 'tab-stock'
media-order-count (integer(1:MAX)) - covers 'multi-part-form'
media-label-type (type3 keyword | name(MAX)) - covers 'labels'
leaving 'envelope', 'envelope-plain', envelope-window', 'continuous-long',
'continuous-short', and 'multi-layer' NOT expressible in IPP.
IDÉE 04: How about adding a "media-type" (type3 keyword | name) which has
keyword values that are identical to the Printer MIB?
ISSUE 05: Should we add the Internet FAX values: 'screen', and
'screen-paged'?
Thanks,
Tom