IPP Mail Archive: IPP> Fwd: Media Standardized Names version

IPP> Fwd: Media Standardized Names version D0.7 is now available

From: RonBergman@aol.com
Date: Fri Apr 20 2001 - 12:10:48 EDT

  • Next message: Hastings, Tom N: "IPP> FW: Media Standardized Names - Units FW: Returned mail: Host unkn own (Name server: .noserver: non-recoverable error)"

    attached mail follows:


    The latest version of the Media Standardized Names specification can be
    downloaded from:

        ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/media-sizes/pwg-media-07.pdf (.doc)

    The major change in this version is the addition of "Appendix A: Media Names
    Usage in
    Existing Standards." All other changes are editorial.

    There are proposals for the addition of several new names which have not
    been include
    in this version. Additional work is necessary to refine the names and
    definitions. They
    should be included in the next version.

    Open issues that I am aware of:

    1. There has been a significant number of email messages concerning the
    scope and
        purpose of this document. Tom Hastings and Don Wright both sent
    messages this
        morning that, I believe, summarize the original intent. I hope this
    issue can be
        discussed and resolved and the scope not be further expanded.

    2. A recommendation for changing the units for metric sizes for mm/10 to
    mm/100
        has been extensively discussed on the list with no resolution. Norbert
    Schade
        stated that he likes mm/100 better, but already has implemented the
    current
        value in UPDF and they are acceptable. I am willing to change the
    document
        to whatever the group decides. My only concern is that I have not seen
    a valid
        technical argument that supports the change. (If there is consensus, "I
    like it
        better" is a valid reason for the change.;-)

    3. The "Media Type" category presently includes several items that have been
    include
        in a "Media Stock" group in the IPP Production Printing Attributes
    document. New
        names proposed for the "Media Type" category have been rejected as
    properly
        belonging to the "Media Stock" group. There has been some concern
    expressed
        that we should just continue to add to the "Type" group and not also
    include the
        "Stock" group. Do we add the "Stock" group or just add more "Types"?

    Tom Hastings will lead the discussion in next weeks meeting.

    Enjoy Portland! (Wish I could be there!)

        Ron Bergman
        Hitachi Koki Imaging Solutions



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 20 2001 - 12:12:15 EDT