Glen,
Conceptually there is no reason a printer could not support a draft mode for multiple resolutions (and this is in fact the case in CUPS/Mac OS X), so preventing both from being specified will do a disservice to the user and printer/driver.
Quality != Resolution. They may be related, and there may in fact be constraints that cause a particular combination to conflict, but they are not mutually exclusive and express separate intent. The IPP/2.0 recommendation to prefer Quality over Resolution when there is a conflict is a pragmatic approach to automatic conflict resolution.
On Feb 1, 2012, at 3:02 PM, Petrie, Glen wrote:
> Mike, Pete, (All)
>> So, should the PJT not specify both but rather specify one or the other? I know that for the PJT, that “quality” is required while “resolution” is optional. So if “quality” is required and always wins; what is the value or need for “resolution”? The spec’s do not have a value of “unknown” or “other” for “quality”; so, the Print Service will not ever use the “resolution” information and, in fact, the “resolution” data simply adds confusion.
>> However, if “quality” and “resolution” were made either-or-but-not-both, then a client could specify either without a “winner”. The other option is add the values “unknown” or “other” to “quality” which directs the Print Service to use “resolution”.
>> Glen
>>> From: Michael Sweet [mailto:msweet at apple.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 12:52 PM
> To: Petrie, Glen
> Cc: mfd at pwg.org> Subject: Re: [MFD] Question on Resolution Versus Qaulity
>> Glen,
>> This is covered in IPP/2.0; basically if there is a conflict between resolution and quality, quality wins.
>> As far as PWG Raster goes, that is a separate capability (PwgRasterDocumentResolutionSupported) that expresses the capabilities of the input side of the printer's imaging engine, while Resolution expresses the capabilities of the output side of the printer's imaging engine.
>> (i.e. a printer might only accept 360dpi raster data but print it at 2880dpi...)
>>> On Feb 1, 2012, at 8:52 AM, Petrie, Glen wrote:
>>> Pete (All),
>> I remember a discussion about resolution versus quality (I think the PWG raster discussions). I thought that is quality and resolution did not agree (as interpreted by the print service capability/definition) then quality was to be used. In the PJT should resolution and quality be denoted as either but not both? Or at least should a note be added?
>> Glen
>>> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
> mfd mailing list
>mfd at pwg.org>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/mfd>> _________________________________________________________
> Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
>
_________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
--
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/mfd/attachments/20120201/c6e7a00b/attachment-0002.html>