We've talked a lot about registering all of the PDLs that are in the Printer
MIB that don't already have a MIME type. Maybe we need to push that
approach. The problem with a client specifying 'application/octet-stream'
when it knows better, is that the Printer may have trouble distinguishing
between some of its supported formats.
From: Michael Sweet [mailto:mike at easysw.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 08:07
To: McDonald, Ira
Cc: 'harryl at us.ibm.com'; Hastings, Tom N; anthony.porter at computer.org;
ipp at pwg.org; venky at teil.soft.net
Subject: Re: IPP> Document-format attribute.. [ipp-mod] clarification
"McDonald, Ira" wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>> I agree with Harry that we should further revise this paragraph
> to indicate that a client MUST specify a particular document
> format when known and MUST NOT use 'application/octet-stream'
Um, that probably won't work too well, since many printer-specific
data streams do not have registered MIME types (e.g. Canon, ALPS,
EPSON, Lexmark, etc.), and a generic print server (e.g. JetDirect,
Axis print server, etc.) probably won't know enough to be able to
enumerate the supported MIME types for the actual device.
SHOULD and SHOULD NOT are probably more appropriate if we are
trying to "encourage" rather than "enforce".
Also, the application/octet-stream information should probably be
updated to reflect a special case for printer objects that list
only application/octet-stream for document-format-supported.
That is, if a client knows the MIME type but the printer object
only supports application/octet-stream, then the printer object
is just acting as a "dumb" printer buffer and the client must
only use the default document format or pass
Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products mike at easysw.com
Printing Software for UNIX http://www.easysw.com