[IPP] Re: PWG Raster comtinue

[IPP] Re: PWG Raster comtinue

[IPP] Re: PWG Raster comtinue

Michael Sweet msweet at apple.com
Wed May 18 03:44:58 UTC 2011

[Again, haven't been keeping up with my email...]

On Apr 27, 2011, at 7:43 AM, Petrie, Glen wrote:
> After thinking on it I decided I should explain in more detail my objection to flip/orientation specification in the raster in more detail.
> All printers should be able to consume (PWG) Raster but it more likely that most mid and higher end printer will consume PDF.  It is also more likely that it will be lower end printers, those with limited resources, which will directly consume (PWG) Raster.  Since by definition they have limited resources it would be burden to have these printers perform flip/orientation transforms that require very large buffers that would basically have to hold an entire page worth of raster data.

That's why the header fields just tell the printer what transform was used by the client when they generated the image. The printer doesn't have to do anything with it - see my prior reply about this subject.

I'll add some more explanatory text and examples to make this clearer. In the end, the transform fields would just be a check for the printer to know that it has what it needs. The printer doesn't have to support re-transforming the raster data - that would go against the primary goal of PWG Raster to support streaming.

Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair

This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20110517/f621dcca/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ipp mailing list