IPP Mail Archive: IPP> MED - telecon to resolve Media Std is

IPP Mail Archive: IPP> MED - telecon to resolve Media Std is

IPP> MED - telecon to resolve Media Std issues, Monday, May 14, 1-2 PM PDT (4-5 PM EDT)

From: Hastings, Tom N (hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com)
Date: Wed May 09 2001 - 13:56:24 EDT

  • Next message: Mitchell: "IPP> Business/Employment Opportunity"

    Don will be able to join us for a telecon to resolve the remaining issues in
    the Media Standardized Name standard. The call info is:

    Monday, May 14, 1-2 PM PDT (4-5 PM EST)
    Phone: (415) 228-4883, passcode: 74584#
    (Xerox folks: 8*534-6413) [confirmation code: 5954723]

    (The Wednesday, May 16 10-12 PDT time that Ron announced in his D0.8 email
    is during the MFPA meeting in Boston to which Don and Bill will be
    attending. However, we can still use that time for other less basic issues,
    if needed.)

    A number of people have pointed out that the reason we are having reaching
    closure on the syntax of the Media Size Self Describing Names, is that we
    don't have an agreed set of requirements. So Ron and I will draft a
    strawman set of requirements today and send them out for mailing list review
    and discussion. It will be the first part of the agenda for Monday, as

    The second part will be to resolve the remaining basic issues:

    The outstanding issues include (from Ron's D0.8 announcement):

    1. Should the format of the Media Size Self Describing Name include the
    units? The meeting in Portland agreed not to include the units but the
    recent teleconference concluded that specifying the units was preferred.
    The Portland agreement uses the "class" name to provide an implied units.

    2. Should the short dimension be separated from the long dimension by a
    hyphen ("-") or an "x"?

    3. How should the "class" (or "prefix") portion of those Self Describing
    Names that are not specified by a sanctioned standards body be defined? I
    have added "om" to those names that did not have a clearly defined "class".
    There are three in Table 6 and five in Table 7. Also, Table 3 has an entry
    "na-asme-..." that could be justified with a class of "asme-" instead of

    More Type Names and Size Names are also likely to be added in the next
    version. (Assuming that we can resolve the above issues first ;-)

    Tom and Ron

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 09 2001 - 13:57:51 EDT