For fonts I believe we can specify font sequences
for PCL 5 and PCL 6 and it will work. However,
for graphics commands using Raster and HP-GL/2,
I think it will be a bit hard. I will
have to do some prototyping (later) to see if it will
work.
For Fonts I think it is probably our only choice
because of our tendencies to add proprietary
escapes.
Encoding escape sequences in XML may be hard. We can
reference a binary file of escape sequences (Binary
ENTITY) or we can use the pre-defined ISO-Latin-1
Character set. Using the latter would mean a driver
has to decode Esc* (1B2Ah) to the binary equivalent
1B2A in hex and send that to the printer. Using
a binary entity the driver would pull the entry
from the file and send it to the printer with
no decoding.
I would lean towards the former so that
the driver would not have to have as much intelligence.
Also it may be difficult to enhance binary definitions
if we require the driver to know their meaning.
Sandra Matts
Sandra Matts
Engineer Scientist
Hewlett-Packard
sandram@boi.hp.com
208-396-4755 phone
Boise, ID 83714
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-upd@pwg.org [mailto:owner-upd@pwg.org]On Behalf Of Norbert
Schade
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2000 2:24 PM
To: UPD group
Subject: UPD> command sequences
The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that we need command
sequences in the UPDF file.
It is simply an illusion that a driver uses a certain HP model as a
reference. I really think every clone and every port of a PDL to a specific
model has its proprietary conditions and even improvements, which are not
100% compatible with the target HP model.
>From my time in Germany, where we developed drivers for many different
companies, I know that a lot of proprietary command sequences have been
invented in the past and that there are tons of proprietary paper source,
paper size, print media, typeface, symbol set and other parameters.
Only very few models would work with a UPD, that anticipates the correctness
of a print file.
Beside the difficulties to describe binary print files - are there other
reasons to not specify command sequences in a UPDF?
Like marketing or policy reasons?
In case we solve the problems to describe that technically, has any company
any other problem?
Norbert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 17 2000 - 15:02:45 EST