The IPP solution using keywords is nearly the same as the text solution
you are proposing. Since the protocol implements keywords as character
strings, the only difference between your text proposal and the current
IPP solution is that someone has to register each new resolution as a
type2 keyword.
Perhaps, what you are saying tacitly is that because the format for
such keywords is Int or IntxInt where each Int value has a well defined
meaning, we could just as well define resolution as a new syntax type and
allow printer vendors to use new values of Int without the need to
register them.
Comments?
Bob Herriot
> From cmanros at cp10.es.xerox.com Fri Jun 6 16:42:36 1997
>> At 01:44 PM 6/6/97 PDT, Neil Joffe wrote:
> >You will need to specify the following pairs:
> >x-res=300, y-res=300
> >x-res=300, y-res=600
> >x-res=600, y-res=600
> >
> >or maybe
> >
> >x-res=600, y-res=600
> >x-res=300, y-res>=xres
>>> Maybe I am too simplistic here, but it seems that everybody in this
> discussion is assuming that the values have to be numeric and hence we have
> to a x-value and a y-value.
>> Why not stay with a simple approach of using ASCII text strings, and just
> define ONE attribute with the value for the attribute being a simple text
> string allowing values like:
>> "300x300"
> "300x600"
> "600x600" etc
>> with an additional rule that what comes before the "x" is the x-value and
> what comes after it is the y-value.
>> This could also allow for cases like:
>> "300"
>> which would be semantically equivalent to:
>> "300x300"
>> Comments?
>> Carl-Uno
>>>> Carl-Uno Manros
> Principal Engineer - Advanced Printing Standards - Xerox Corporation
> 701 S. Aviation Blvd., El Segundo, CA, M/S: ESAE-231
> Phone +1-310-333 8273, Fax +1-310-333 5514
> Email: manros at cp10.es.xerox.com>