I agree with Michael's position on this. I don't believe there is
any advantage in defining single or two sided.
From: Michael Sweet [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 7:14 AM
To: Hastings, Tom N
Cc: email@example.com; IMAGING@forum.upnp.org; GRANT,MELINDA
(HP-Vancouver,ex1); Mark VanderWiele (E-mail)
Subject: Re: IPP> Proposed deletions and additions to Media Types for
"Hastings, Tom N" wrote:
> But leave in the two-sided for the stationery-coated, stationery-
> glossy, and stationery-matte, correct?
For the purposes of defining the media type, it's probably best to
keep both photo and stationary media ambigious (e.g. "may or may not
be coated on both sides") than to say something specific. These are
already generalized names anyways, and in actual use (media-col, etc.)
we have the means of identifying more specific requirements.
-- ______________________________________________________________________ Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products firstname.lastname@example.org Printing Software for UNIX http://www.easysw.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 18 2001 - 10:59:29 EDT