UPD Mail Archive: UPD> Re: IPP> MED - Proposal for simple

UPD> Re: IPP> MED - Proposal for simple Media Self Describing Names (all in onenames)

From: Michael Sweet (mike@easysw.com)
Date: Tue Apr 10 2001 - 16:24:14 EDT

  • Next message: don@lexmark.com: "Re: UPD> Re: UPDF open standard for locales"

    "Hastings, Tom N" wrote:
    > ...
    > A valid Media Self Describing Name MUST include the Media Size Self
    > Describing Name (both Size Name and Dimensions fields as defined in
    > the D0.5 Draft) followed by other fields which MUST be in the
    > following order:
    > ...

    What about a media with a glossy back finish but a matte front
    finish? Do you then explicitly include the "matte" for the front

    Also, this requires the parser to know what keywords go with what
    attribute - that is, "matte" is a finish attribute, and "bond" is
    a media type name, "80-gram" is a media weight, etc...

    If we are going to make this a "standard", then we probably want
    to require any intervening names to be included, for example:


    should be:




    with any unspecified fields *after* the last one set to the
    default (or matching any value)

    This is one of the reasons I think we should not try to add
    all-in-one names to the spec, but should use the existing
    mechanisms (e.g. for IPP the "media-col" attribute) and just
    standardize the naming of the values.

    Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products                  mike@easysw.com
    Printing Software for UNIX                       http://www.easysw.com

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 10 2001 - 16:25:53 EDT