PMP Mail Archive: Re: PMP> Localization conclusion - prtGeneralPrinterName

PMP Mail Archive: Re: PMP> Localization conclusion - prtGeneralPrinterName

Re: PMP> Localization conclusion - prtGeneralPrinterName

Ira Mcdonald x10962 (
Thu, 24 Jul 1997 09:30:22 PDT

Hi Jay,

I've been away for two days, missing the fun but... I haven't
even read 'Dave's UTF-8 proposal', because it's somewhere in
200 mail notes here. If the proposal is to simply take the
currently unlocalized, ASCII code set strings and shift them
to UTF-8, NO Xerox will not readily agree. That would break
both the existing HP and Lexmark products (who have said they
are already using OTHER 8-bit code sets, with ASCII as a
7-bit subset). It would also prevent the use of the ISO 8859-x
code sets in Europe (NOT acceptable to RankXerox). And RFC 2130
does not say no new protocol should allow multiple code sets.
It just says the default set shall be Unicode UCS-2 encoded
into UTF-8 form.

I thought that Lloyd was just asking about aligning the SYNTAX
clause of 'prtGeneralPrinterName' with whatever develops for
the code set of the other OCTET STRINGs (not currently
controlled by 'preGeneral[Current|Console]Localization').

- Ira McDonald (outside consultant at Xerox)

------------------------- Jay's note ---------------------------
Return-Path: <>
Received: from zombi ( by (4.1/XeroxClient-1.1)
id AA15746; Thu, 24 Jul 97 12:10:31 EDT
Received: from by zombi (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA02639; Thu, 24 Jul 97 12:07:20 EDT
Received: from ([]) by with SMTP id <52233(3)>; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 09:06:34 PDT
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA21072 for <>; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 12:02:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by (bulk_mailer v1.5); Thu, 24 Jul 1997 12:01:54 -0400
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA20950 for pmp-outgoing; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 12:00:55 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 09:00:54 PDT
From: JK Martin <>
Message-Id: <>
Subject: Re: PMP> Localization conclusion - prtGeneralPrinterName
X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII
Status: R


With all due respect, it does appear that the two widely divided
camps may be quickly coming to full agreement, so it may be just
a bit premature to terminate discussion at this point.

In particular, if you're asking each of us post a vote message
saying "I agree" or "I disagree", exactly what are we agreeing
to? Tom's SYNTHESIS proposal, or Dave's UTF-8 proposal?

I, for one, am waiting anxiously to hear what Xerox thinks of
Dave's UTF-8 proposal. If they can agree to the UTF-8 proposal,
then I think we have the highest level of conformance thus far
on this nasty issue.


----- Begin Included Message -----

>From Thu Jul 24 11:17 EDT 1997
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 11:15:56 -0400
Subject: PMP> Localization conclusion - prtGeneralPrinterName

Chris and I are bringing the localization discussion to
conclusion. There have been some side proposals that have
come up from time to time, I wanted to separate these out
to see if we have consensus on these proposed changes. One
of the side proposals was to change the syntax of the
prtGeneralPrinterName from DisplayString to OCTET STRING.
If we want to make this change, I would propose the size
be (0 to 63). I have checked with our networking people
and this size covers all operating systems that we are
aware of.

I know most of us are tried of reading about localization
and answering questions about localization. The only
answer I want back from this note is "I agree" or
"I disagree". Please leave the subject line as stated so
I can easily count the votes.
Lloyd Young Lexmark International, Inc.
Senior Program Manager Dept. C14L/Bldg. 035-3
Strategic Alliances 740 New Circle Road NW
internet: Lexington, KY 40550
Phone: (606) 232-5150 Fax: (606) 232-6740

----- End Included Message -----