Hi Glen,
Where we are currently reaching out to some printer manufacturers who have
previously not participated in PWG activities (portable printer
manufacturers, thermal transfer-direct thermal printer manufacturers) to let
them know about the IPP Anywhere project and the PWG Raster Format, I am in
favor of waiting for a little while to see if we get some interest from the
reach out activities before making a final decision on your request.
If we do get some participation from the printer manufacturers outlined
above, they might also find some value in the feature you are requesting so
I believe it is a little premature to reject the idea of adding the field at
this time.
Best Regards,
/Paul
--
Paul Tykodi
Principal Consultant
TCS - Tykodi Consulting Services LLC
Tel/Fax: 603-343-1820
Mobile: 603-866-0712
E-mail: ptykodi at tykodi.com
WWW: <http://www.tykodi.com/> http://www.tykodi.com
From: ipp-bounces at pwg.org [mailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org] On Behalf Of Petrie,
Glen
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 3:08 PM
To: Ira McDonald
Cc: ipp at pwg.org
Subject: RE: [IPP] Requested Additions to PWG Raster
Uncle !!!!!!!!!
It is an optional field and completely testable in an interoperability test.
Glen
_____
From: Ira McDonald [mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 11:52 AM
To: Petrie, Glen; Ira McDonald
Cc: Michael Sweet; ipp at pwg.org
Subject: Re: [IPP] Requested Additions to PWG Raster
Hi Glen,
I agree with Mike here in objecting to registering these fields.
PWG standards are supposed to only contain fields/attributes
that *could* be tested in an interoperability event. It's not
plausible that a typical streaming client would know the size
when it's very large (when the feature's useful), so such a
feature's not interoperable or verifiable.
Cheers,
- Ira
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG IPP WG
Co-Chair - TCG Hardcopy WG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music/High North Inc
http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic
<http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc>
http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com
Christmas through April:
579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176
734-944-0094
May to Christmas:
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
906-494-2434
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Petrie, Glen <glen.petrie at eitc.epson.com>
wrote:
As stated below, I do understand objection to adding the field. I would to
hear from other PWG members on the addition of these fields.
Glen
_____
From: Michael Sweet [mailto:msweet at apple.com]
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 10:20 AM
To: Petrie, Glen
Cc: ipp at pwg.org
Subject: Re: [IPP] Requested Additions to PWG Raster
On Apr 22, 2011, at 9:34 AM, Petrie, Glen wrote:
...
[gwp] The important case is the size of the compressed raster data. The
decompressed size is recorded only if the raster is uncompressed.
[gwp] I agree that some (a few or a lot) of implementation may not provide
the information but as I said, I am requesting that the assignment be made
and those who can (want to) may record the size information.
It really isn't a matter of "may not provide", in most cases clients (and
printers) simply can't buffer hundreds of megabytes of raster data. I can
add the field, but since most producers of PWG Raster will not be able to
supply the compressed size of the raster no printer will be able to depend
on it anyways, so IMHO it is best to have the printer, if it is going to do
any local processing of full page images, use its own optimal internal
storage format than try to gerry-rig something into the format that just
won't work.
[gwp] As I stated in my original request, I am not worried about the
printer, it will accept the streaming input just fine. I want the size
information for navigation of a many page raster without having to
decompress pages in a serial manor. I am not jerry-rigging anything. I do
not understand your comment "that just won't work". It works fine. In
fact, I wrote a routine that will find the size-only of compressed page by
running the compression routine without storing the compressed data. I
don't understand your objection to assigning the field.
...
I would actually prefer to flag the file as version 3 which is an
uncompressed CUPS Raster with the version 2 page header. And in the case of
local processing, you'll likely want to use native word order (another
feature of CUPS Raster that we are not bringing along for PWG Raster...)
[gwp] Do you mean big/little-endian? I am nothing requesting the word
ordering flag (value) be used. The current specification is ok.
My main point was that if you are concerned about having a standard
representation for intermediate data, CUPS Raster already provides that. If
you are trying to tweak PWG Raster for use as an internal representation
format then I'd rather not put that in the standard since internal formats
are OOS for any PWG standard.
Would it be sufficient to document an uncompressed version of PWG Raster
(with the "RAS3" file header) and then mark the native word order support as
out-of-scope for the spec but something that might be used internally?
[gwp] I believe the RAS3 is for the entire PWG Raster file. I am requesting
a flags (value) for individual pages.
Since the format does not support this, I would be opposed to adding
something that would be used only for an internal representation of a PWG
Raster file.
[gwp] Again, I do not understand your objection.
________________________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by <http://www.mailscanner.info/> MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
_______________________________________________
ipp mailing list
ipp at pwg.orghttps://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by <http://www.mailscanner.info/> MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20110422/d19dec76/attachment-0001.html>