From: Harry Lewis (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Apr 25 2006 - 23:24:05 EDT
Norbert, thanks for sharing these experiences with the PWG. I am very glad
to see some useful application of UPDF, especially considering all the
effort you and others in the PWG put into it. I'm sure you are aware of
the recent OSDL print summit. It seems like UPDF might be a technology
they would like to investigate as they attempt to migrate Linux off the
traditional use of PPDs.
Chairman - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
IBM Printing Systems
"Norbert Schade" <norbert.schade@SigmaTel.com>
Sent by: firstname.lastname@example.org
04/25/2006 02:14 PM
UPD> latest news on UPDF
I wonder who is still on the reflector.
Thought i?d share some news on the use of UPDF.
Some of you may remember that i joined Oasis Semiconductor in 2004 (BTW:
Oasis has been acquired by SigmaTel in September 2005. but our host
software department was not affected too much).
Pretty soon after i joined the group we decided that the set of UPDF
schemas could help us well in some areas.
We started using it as part of our specifications to avoid ambiguous
descriptions of driver features and according parameters. That proved to
be very reliable and we are still doing it today.
A bit later we thought about using the same xml instances we already got
due to the specifications in the real drivers.
Ok, a larger effort.
And we needed some time.
Guess what? We have it working.
We are making extensive use of the PWG schemas with focus on the UPDF
schemas in our print and fax drivers. Even in our scanner drivers we use
the string handling as designed in UPDF.
If anybody wants to know further details, i?d be quite open to talk it
Just to mention two cute issues we now love to have:
- string handling
we can change any string in any of our xml locale instances and
immediately validate it in the corresponding UI ? without re-compilation.
So we can easily simulate a translator?s job at the customer?s site. No
translator has to deal with C code or header files. Any common XML editor
will do. Even standard text editors are ok (however i would not recommend
them, as i love the validation feature of the xml editors).
- Device description
it?s convenient to add another media size record to the xml based device
description or just change its values and see it used. I can even do that
after installation. The biggest advantage is that we can easily agree on
unambiguous parameters with customers. They don?t have to understand any
source code to see how it?s used.
I like it. Ok, may be that?s not too much of a surprise.
As a side effect we could prove that all schemas are perfectly usable for
driver development ? with one little exception. And it?s certainly not the
typical day-by-day use.
But i will explain that in a separate email in a minute.
Other than that everything is just fine.
Our drivers have passed a number of QA cycles in the last half year. So we
are confident we have thoroughly investigated all circumstances.
we have drivers now based on the Semantic Model and the UPDF schemas under
Windows platforms starting from 98SE up to XP.
And if at any time we would face an operating system that makes a more
intense use of xml to describe device capabilities, i wonder, if i could
actually enjoy that. what platform could that be :>)))
Just thought this might be of interest to the group.
Host Software Manager
201 Jones Road
Waltham, MA 02451
This email message and any attachments are confidential, proprietary, and
may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify
Oasis Semiconductor, Inc. immediately -- by replying to this message
and/or calling 781-370-8989 -- and immediately destroy all copies of this
message and any attachments. Furthermore, you are hereby notified that any
copying, disclosure, dissemination, or distribution of this email
communication is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Apr 25 2006 - 23:21:23 EDT