The trick here is that there are also implementations in the field that do
the same thing with extensions to print quality - e.g.
(Ultra|High|Normal|Draft|EconoFast) {insert any SpinalTap jokes about "my
amp goes to 11" here ;)}. In other words, PrintQuality is already being
used to provide optimization options between PQ/Saving/Speed. I don't have
a fundamental issue with declaring *Saving - but the semantics to me are
somewhat duplicative with how PrintQuality is actually used in many
implementations. I'd also add that, as Harry noted, there are algorithm(s)
"plural" that can save toner/ink/market, so *Saving is probably a
vendor-extensible enumeration, not a boolean - which makes it look yet more
like PrintQuality.
bt
-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Lewis [mailto:harryl at us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 3:05 PM
To: TAYLOR,BOB (HP-Vancouver,ex1)
Cc: IPP Discussion List (IPP at pwg.org); printing-driver at freestandards.org;
printing-jobticket at freestandards.org; Zehler, Peter
Subject: RE: [printing-driver] RE: IPP> Print Quality Issue resolution
>My main question with TonerSaving/InkSaving/MarkerSaving is how this is any
different than PrintQuality(High|Normal|Draft)
To answer this question, straightforward, there are implementations where
you can select High|Normal|Draft independently from "Saver". Administrators
may want to configure policy that "Saving" must always be on yet still allow
the choice of High|Normal|Draft, within that context.
>PrintQuality=High & MarkerSaving=False would seem to say "print in high
quality, and waste toner/ink for no good reason
I think people would expect:
PQ=High|Saving=Off to result in the BEST possible quality.
PQ=High|Saving=On to result in the best possible quality while still saving
marker (toner, ink ...)
PQ=Draft|Saving=Off to result in the FASTEST possible printing
PQ=Draft|Saving=On to result in the fastest possible printing with
legibility that may not stand up to close scrutiny because marker (toner,
ink...) has been used sparingly.
----------------------------------------------
Harry Lewis
Chairman - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
http://www.pwg.org
IBM Printing Systems
http://www.ibm.com/printers
303-924-5337
----------------------------------------------
"TAYLOR,BOB (HP-Vancouver,ex1)" <bobt at hp.com>
Sent by: owner-ipp at pwg.org
07/14/2003 02:36 PM
To
printing-driver at freestandards.org, "Zehler, Peter" <PZehler at crt.xerox.com>
cc
"IPP Discussion List (IPP at pwg.org)" <IPP at pwg.org>,
printing-jobticket at freestandards.org
Subject
RE: [printing-driver] RE: IPP> Print Quality Issue resolution
My main question with TonerSaving/InkSaving/MarkerSaving is how this is any
different than PrintQuality(High|Normal|Draft). We as well have nifty
algorithms for saving "marker" without impacting quality - but I don't know
why we'd ever want to turn it "off" seperately from the notion of
PQ/performance/economy tradeoff (which I maintain is what PrintQuality
actually is). The semantics of this as a separate attribute seem somewhat
odd to me - i.e., PrintQuality=High & MarkerSaving=False would seem to say
"print in high quality, and waste toner/ink for no good reason", and
PrintQuality=Draft & MarkerSaving=False would seem to say "print in poor
quality, but waste tone/ink anyway". IMHO, a "separate" TonerSaving mode is
really a vendor-specific extension of PrintQuality, which as Ira noted as
already supported (though they are supposed to be IANA-registered, which I'm
guessing most vendors have not bothered to do).
thanks,
bt
-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Lewis [mailto:harryl at us.ibm.com]
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 6:49 AM
To: Zehler, Peter
Cc: IPP Discussion List (IPP at pwg.org); printing-driver at freestandards.org;
printing-jobticket at freestandards.org; Zehler, Peter
Subject: [printing-driver] RE: IPP> Print Quality Issue resolution
My concern is that "save toner" is probably the most concrete concept
compared to "Good, Better, Best" or "Text, Image, Graphics". The later has
efficient application only in special cases (some of which may be very
significant, like printing photo's). Otherwise, people stare at their mixed
object document and wonder. I feel "save toner" should be explicit.
We went from a flat set of descriptors to a pairing.. perhaps we should
really go to a matrix (although I don't like the perceived complexity)
Good - Better - Best
Text - Text+Graphics - Graphics - Image
TonerSaving
----------------------------------------------
Harry Lewis
Chairman - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
http://www.pwg.org
IBM Printing Systems
http://www.ibm.com/printers
303-924-5337
----------------------------------------------
"Zehler, Peter" <PZehler at crt.xerox.com>
07/11/2003 04:54 AM
To
Harry Lewis/Boulder/IBM at IBMUS, "Zehler, Peter" <PZehler at crt.xerox.com>
cc
"IPP Discussion List (IPP at pwg.org)" <IPP at pwg.org>,
printing-driver at freestandards.org, printing-jobticket at freestandards.org
Subject
RE: IPP> Print Quality Issue resolution
Harry,
We felt that there are many different attributes involved in heuristics for
saving toner and printing fast. Some of those are "resolution", "media" and
aspects of the document content. We felt the requirements were met by
keeping the existing "print-quality" values and augmenting them with hints
on how to process the document content to achieve 'draft' 'normal' and
'high'. The assumption is that draft is fastest and uses the least toner.
Pete
Peter Zehler
XEROX
Xerox Innovation Group
Email: PZehler at crt.xerox.com
Voice: (585) 265-8755
FAX: (585) 422-7961
US Mail: Peter Zehler
Xerox Corp.
800 Phillips Rd.
M/S 128-25E
Webster NY, 14580-9701
-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Lewis [mailto:harryl at us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 11:26 PM
To: Zehler, Peter
Cc: IPP Discussion List (IPP at pwg.org); printing-driver at freestandards.org;
printing-jobticket at freestandards.org
Subject: Re: IPP> Print Quality Issue resolution
> We finally agreed that the two values 'save-toner' and 'speed' are implied
by the "print-quality". Since they were not required, they were removed.
I think this warrants further examination. I have known toner saving methods
that do a very good job of preserving print quality.
----------------------------------------------
Harry Lewis
Chairman - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
http://www.pwg.org
IBM Printing Systems
http://www.ibm.com/printers
303-924-5337
----------------------------------------------
"Zehler, Peter" <PZehler at crt.xerox.com>
Sent by: owner-ipp at pwg.org
07/10/2003 01:41 PM
To
"IPP Discussion List (IPP at pwg.org)" <IPP at pwg.org>,
printing-jobticket at freestandards.org, printing-driver at freestandards.org
cc
Subject
IPP> Print Quality Issue resolution
All,
During the PWG/FSG meeting in Portland we had a discussion about the IPP
"print-quality" attribute and FSG's desire to add two new values, 'economy'
and 'fine', where 'economy' is lower than 'draft' and 'fine' is higher than
'high'. The FSG further proposed the addition of a new attribute, called
"print-optimize", that would augment "print-quality" with values of 'image',
'photo', 'text', 'text-and-image', 'save-toner' and 'speed'.
With regard to 'economy' and 'fine', we agreed that 'economy' would map to
"print-quality"='draft' and 'fine' to "print-quality"='high'. There may be
end user visible features that map to multiple attributes. We leave it to
specific print domains to model these higher level aggregate features. When
appropriate we will add needed elements to the Semantic Model.
There was a lot of push back on "print-optimize". The main concern was that
"print-optimize" contained a mixed bag of items. The two main categories
were content metadata and rendering hints. We finally agreed that the two
values 'save-toner' and 'speed' are implied by the "print-quality". Since
they were not required, they were removed. The remaining values are needed
to direct the type of optimization/processing that will be performed on the
content. It does not necessarily mean the value describes the content. To
clarify this we changed the attribute name to "print-content-optimize".
Finally the value 'image' seemed the same as 'photo'. The name for this was
changed to 'graphic'.
As a result the following attribute will be added to the JobX specification
in it next revision.
print-content-optimize (type2 keyword)
This attribute refines the value specified by the print-quality
attribute.
The standard keyword values are:
'graphic': optimize for graphic clarity
'photo': optimize for photo clarity
'text': optimize for text clarity
'text-and-graphic': optimize for both text and graphic clarity
Peter Zehler
XEROX
Xerox Innovation Group
Email: PZehler at crt.xerox.com
Voice: (585) 265-8755
FAX: (585) 422-7961
US Mail: Peter Zehler
Xerox Corp.
800 Phillips Rd.
M/S 128-25E
Webster NY, 14580-9701
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.pwg.org/archives/ipp/attachments/20030715/29ca252a/attachment.html