Thanks for the clarification.
Thanks for a very concise summary.
One small proposed edit.
"Should we also allow Profile 2? Profile 2 is a combination of Profile
1 and Profile 4....Go ahead and add it."
"Should we also allow Profile 2? Profile 2 allows much greater
flexibility than Profile 1 and may be considered the Huffman counter
part to Profile 4, with less complexity....Go ahead and add it."
Next Meeting May 21, 1-3PM Pacific
Review of PDF/is spec:
(3.1) Fonts allowed but only for invisible text. (No font data is
Encryption has been removed.
No Gray color space (no release from HP); use index into sRGB (alignment
with latest PDF). sRGB and the indexed color space must be included in
all PDF/is docs
Digital signatures will be allowed by PDF/a.
Table 3-2: rearranged and reworded.
Sec 4.3 JBIG2Decode Filter: allow profile 3 (T.89) Because 3 is a subset
of 4 which we already allowed. Should we also allow Profile 2? Profile
2 is a combination of Profile 1 and Profile 4....Go ahead and add it.
Sec 4.4 is YUV a valid color space? It's legal for JPEG and
should be the RECOMMENDED type.
IPP Fax Protocol spec
Section 6.6: How do we want the string to appear?
PDF/is-1.0 (Tom Would you add this value to your spec?)
6.6 documents-format-version-supported - Allow any flavor of
Restart section at 9.
From: Gail Songer
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 4:09 PM
Subject: IFX> Conference Call
Should IPP Fax allow any form of PDF beside PDF/is? See the issues
around the topic below
Next call, Wednesday April 30 at 1PM Pacific.
ICC profile - no progress
Notifications - no progress
pwg_letter-or-A4 - no progress
pdl-override - lots of discussion on the IPP reflector. No resolution
digital-signature - in Document-object spec.
The document-object spec may get bogged down. Need to keep tabs on it's
progress; we may need to reconsider our dependence on that spec if it
looks like it will take longer to finish last call than we are willing
document-format-version - should it be used in Get-Printer-Attributes
(should you be able to color on it? TomH)? (Ira doesn't want it)
Ira would like to take out document-format-version and
document-format-version-supported. Messy conformance requirements
because we are requiring only a small part of the document-object spec
and the document-object may not be as close to completion as previously
thought. However, we had wanted IPPFax to allow other flavors of PDF
and therefore would need to be able to specify what versions and you
might not have access to an IPP port.
Start next meeting: Section 7
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 07 2003 - 18:57:28 EDT