IPP> MOD - Loose length restrictions definitions for 'xxxWithLanguage'

IPP> MOD - Loose length restrictions definitions for 'xxxWithLanguage'

IPP> MOD - Loose length restrictions definitions for 'xxxWithLanguage'

Zehler, Peter Peter.Zehler at usa.xerox.com
Thu Jan 6 12:51:50 EST 2000


	All,

	I have had a few conversations in this area and can see that the
length specification for textWithLanguage and nameWithLanguage  is a little
loose.  The description below applies to name as well as text.

	One interpretation comes from first reading the definition for
'text'.  
	"A text attribute is an attribute whose value is a sequence of zero
or more characters encoded in a maximum of 1023 ('MAX') octets. " 
	One interpretation is that the "super type" 'text' is limited to
1023 octets.  Therefore, the total length of 'textWithLanguage' is limited
to 1023 octets.  The 'language' portion of 'textWithLanguage'  is limited to
63 octets.  The result is that the length of the 'language' portion of
'textWithLanguage' "eats away" at the length of the 'text' portion.  The two
error cases, with respect to length, are the length of 'language' exceeds 63
octets and the combined length of 'language' and 'text' exceeds 1023 octets.
	  
	Another interpretation is from the definition of 'textWithLanguage'
itself.  The 'textWithLanguage' definition contains:
	"The 'textWithLanguage' attribute syntax is a compound attribute
syntax consisting of two parts: a 'textWithoutLanguage' part plus an
additional 'naturalLanguage' " 
	This verbiage together with the length definition of
'textWithoutLanguage of 1023 octets seems to imply a different conclusion.
The total length of an attribute value of type 'textWithLanguage' would be
1086.  (This ignores the lengths types and attribute name portions of the
encoding)  In this interpretation the 'language' portion does not "eat away"
at the length of the 'text' portion.  The resulting two error cases, with
respect to length, are the length of 'language' exceeds 63 octets and the
length of 'text' exceeds 1023 octets

	Which interpretation is correct?

	I favor the second interpretation since it simplifies the
transformation between the two forms of 'text'.

	The resolution should be clarified in the IIG and moved to the MOD
on the next iteration.

	Pete



				Peter Zehler
				XEROX
				Xerox Architecture Center
				Email: Peter.Zehler at usa.xerox.com
				Voice:    (716) 265-8755
				FAX:      (716) 265-8792 
				US Mail: Peter Zehler
				        Xerox Corp.
				        800 Phillips Rd.
				        M/S 139-05A
				        Webster NY, 14580-9701





More information about the Ipp mailing list