IFX Mail Archive: IFX> FW: option 5 for TIFF-FX [plan from L

IFX Mail Archive: IFX> FW: option 5 for TIFF-FX [plan from L

IFX> FW: option 5 for TIFF-FX [plan from Lloyd McIntyre]

From: McDonald, Ira (IMcDonald@crt.xerox.com)
Date: Thu Oct 11 2001 - 11:18:18 EDT

  • Next message: Bergman, Ron: "IFX> New Compression Keywords"

    -----Original Message-----
    From: McIntyre, Lloyd [mailto:Lloyd.McIntyre@pahv.xerox.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 5:19 PM
    To: 'Hiroshi Tamura'; ietf-fax@imc.org
    Cc: Claudio.Allocchio@garr.it
    Subject: RE: option 5 for TIFF-FX

    Tamura-san,
    In line with your request and outline I have prepared a proposed plan,
    please see below.

    Lloyd

    Option 5 Proposed Plan

      Draft DELIVERABLES
    The following three specifications should be delivered to address the MIME
    sub-type issue:
    1) draft-ietf-fax-tiff-regbis-03
       revisions to existing draft draft-ietf-fax-tiff-regbis-02
    2) draft-ietf-fax-tiffx-reg-00
       a new draft
    3) draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-10
       revisions to existing draft draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-09

    Rational for these deliverables are driven by the current image/tiff MIME
    sub-type definition, see appendix below, and the recent WG consensus to
    a) retain the current single TIFF-FX specification,
    b) limit the image/tiff MIME sub-type definition and .tif (.tiff) file
    extension to TIFF 6.0 and the TIFF-FX profiles that are renderable by the
    current viewer base (Profiles S and F),
    c) define a new MIME sub-type and file extension (e.g. image/tiffx and .tfx
    respectively) to refer to other TIFF-FX profiles.

      TIMELINES
    The progression timeline is as follows:
    - The three drafts should be available for WG review prior to November.
    - Given the limited MIME sub-type scope, it may be possible to have
    incremental versions of these drafts issued as appropriate in time for the
    December IETF meeting.
    - A rough consensus check of the drafts should be targeted for the December
    WG meeting.
    - A test plan draft for draft-ietf-fax-tiffx-reg-xx interoperability testing
    and verification of that current viewers can successfully read Profile S & F
    should be available for the WG meeting.
    - End of January 2002 is the target for completion of the test plan and
    sign-up of participants.
    - End of February 2002 may then be a reasonable target for completion of
    draft-ietf-fax-tiffx-reg-xx interoperability testing, along with Profile S &
    F viewing confirmation.
    - WG Last Call of the three drafts should be targeted for the March IETF
    meeting.
    - If all is smooth, it may be reasonable that Draft Standard or at least
    Proposed Standard would be issued early during 2Q02, dependent on IESG
    responsiveness.

      DELIVERABLES DESCRIPTION
    1) draft-ietf-fax-tiff-regbis-03
    The objective of tiff-regbis-03 draft is to constrain the image/tiff MIME
    sub-type and file extension definition to TIFF 6.0 and TIFF-FX Profiles S
    and F.
     
    The most significant draft-ietf-fax-tiff-regbis-02 edits required to realize
    this objective would take the form of:
    a) section 6.1 "image/tiff" - changing the image/tiff definition to refer to
    TIFF 6.0 and TIFF-FX Profiles S and F encoded image data, and deleting
    reference to definition of a new "application parameter". The fixed content
    defined by image/tiff makes retention of the application parameter
    inappropriate.
    b) section 6.2 "Application parameter" - deleting this section.
    c) section 7. "IANA Registration" - changing the value for "Optional
    parameters" from "application" to "none", and appending appropriate TIFF-FX
    Profiles S & F reference to the Published specification.
    The draft-ietf-fax-tiff-regbis-03 draft would retain its Best Common
    Practice non-standards track.

    An outline for readability verification of Profiles S & F by current viewers
    should also be prepared.

    Dependencies
    Availability of draft-ietf-fax-tiff-regbis-02 authors.

    2) draft-ietf-fax-tiffx-reg-00
    The objective of this new tiffx-reg-00 draft is to define the new MIME
    sub-type (e.g. image/tiffx) and file extension (e.g. .tfx) for TIFF-FX
    Profiles J, C, L and M and any TIFF-FX extensions. It may be possible to
    include optional provisions for Profiles S & F - value is a comprehensive
    sub-type.

    It is reasonable that the WG will agree to progress
    draft-ietf-fax-tiffx-reg-xx on a non-standards track path (e.g.
    Informational or Best Common Practices), similar to
    draft-ietf-fax-tiff-regbis-xx.

    A test plan for an appropriate level of draft-ietf-fax-tiffx-reg-xx
    interoperability testing should also be prepared.

    Dependencies
    The WG must agree whether optional provisions for Profiles S & F should be
    included, allowing for a comprehensive MIME sub-type. WG decision on the
    progression path of the document, standards vs. non-standards track, will
    have the greatest overall schedule impact. Progressing as Proposed could add
    a year to the schedule.

    3) draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-10
    The objective of draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-10 is to reference both image/tiff
    and the new MIME sub-type (e.g. image/tiffx) as being required and specify
    the encodings to be used with image/tiff vs. the new MIME sub-type when
    transported by MIME.

    The section 9 paragraph of draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-09 should be revised to
    reference both image/tiff and the new MIME sub-type as being required, along
    with stipulation as to which should be used for Profiles S & F versus the
    other profiles plus TIFF-FX extensions. Section 9.1, which defines the faxbw
    and faxcolor application parameters, should be deleted.
    Given that the changes are isolated to a small section of MIME sub-type
    reference and no new TIFF features are added, it may be reasonable that
    draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-10 will continue its current standards track path
    pending maturation of draft-ietf-fax-tiffx-reg-xx.

    Dependencies
    The greatest schedule impact will be driven by whether TIFF-FX is required
    to be recycled as a Proposed Standard or allowed to continue in its current
    Draft Standards path. Recycling to Proposed could add a year to the
    schedule.

      APPENDIX: MIME sub-type definitions:
    i) RFC 2302 and draft-ietf-fax-tiff-regbis-02, currently under consideration
    to obsolete RFC 2302 as Best Common Practice, describe the current
    image/tiff MIME sub-type registration. The image/tiff definition refers to
    TIFF 6.0 encoded image data and adds a new "application parameter"
    (definition of parameter values left to other RFCs) to enable identification
    of specific subset of TIFF and TIFF extensions for the encoded image data.

    ii) Section 9 of RFC 2301 (aka TIFF-FX) and draft-ietf-fax-tiff-fx-09,
    currently under consideration to obsolete RFC 2301 as Draft Standard,
    defines two image/tiff application parameters, faxbw and faxcolor. The faxbw
    application parameter value is used for TIFF-FX profiles define to support
    encoding of black-and-white image data (Profiles S, F or J), while faxcolor
    is used for TIFF-FX profiles define to support encoding of color image data
    (Profiles C, L or M).

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Hiroshi Tamura [mailto:tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp]
    > Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 3:06 AM
    > To: ietf-fax@imc.org
    > Cc: Claudio.Allocchio@garr.it
    > Subject: Re: option 5 for TIFF-FX
    >
    >
    >
    > Folks,
    >
    > > As you already know, there are lots for favors for option 5.
    > > Therefore, the conlusion is "option 5"
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > > I think TIFF-FX editors and the people who support it should provide
    > > somthing at first. Please do it.
    >
    > No mails so far. I comment it.
    >
    > At first, we need new two or more I-Ds.
    > - Revised tiff-fx document
    > - New or Revised registration document for image/tiff or/and
    > new MIME type.
    > At least, those documents should be available prior to
    > December IETF meeting.
    > The sooner, the better.
    >
    > Next, implementation tests.
    > According to the I-Ds or revised I-Ds after getting some consensus
    > at the meeting or in our ML, the tests should be done.
    > New MIME type tests must be included.
    > It may be better to include the test for Profile S and F
    > with the use of image/tiff.
    > At the earliest, they will be done in January or February, I think.
    >
    > After that, the final I-Ds will be availble.
    >
    > License issues should be clarified in parallel.
    >
    > Again,
    > TIFF-FX editors and the people who support it should comment for it.
    >
    > Regards,
    > --
    > Hiroshi Tamura, Co-chair of IETF-FAX WG
    > E-mail: tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 11 2001 - 11:18:34 EDT