attachment
<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi there,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">PWG 5100.7 5.3.1.15 and 5.3.1.16 define the "media-size" and "media-size-name" members of "media-col" thus:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><img apple-inline="yes" id="361AFCC9-BC46-4482-8462-6D8C83712AC7" src="cid:BA285424-56E0-49ED-BEE0-9D637C1528FE" class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">What isn't clear to me is whether a Printer will be running a risk if it decides to implement "media-size-name" instead of "media-size", since Clients aren't required to support it? If that is the case, then I'm not sure how a Printer could go about supporting "media-size-name" without risking interoperability issues with Clients.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Am I reading this correctly? If I'm not, I think we have some work to do on this because I don't know how "media-size-name" provides value given that set of normative requirements.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Thanks for any thoughts,</div><div class=""><br class=""><div class="">Smith<br class=""><br class="">/**<br class=""> Smith Kennedy<br class=""> HP Inc.<br class="">*/</div><br class=""></div></body></html>