Hi Pete,
The IANA IPP Registry is flat for a given attribute (e.g., media-type),
and sorted alphabetically by keyword values, so "stationery" (base
keyword) comes first and is followed by all of the qualified keywords,
e.g., "stationery-coated".
Cheers,
- Ira
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG IPP WG
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - TCG Embedded Systems Hardcopy SG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music/High North Inc
http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusichttp://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com
Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094
Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Zehler, Peter <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com> wrote:
> All,
>> I can live with ‘-archival’, ‘-bond’ and ‘-cotton’ extensions. Is there a
> registration for the extensions or do we register all the compound names
> with ‘stationery’, ‘cardstock’, ‘label’ and ‘photographic’ as the top
> level?
>> Pete
>>>>>> Peter Zehler
>> Xerox Research Center Webster
> Email: Peter.Zehler at Xerox.com> Voice: (585) 265-8755
> FAX: (585) 265-7441
> US Mail: Peter Zehler
> Xerox Corp.
> 800 Phillips Rd.
> M/S 128-25E
> Webster NY, 14580-9701
>>>> From: Michael Sweet [mailto:msweet at apple.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 7:48 PM
> To: Zehler, Peter
> Cc: ptykodi at tykodi.com; ipp at pwg.org>>> Subject: Re: [IPP] media-type names and cotton?
>>>> Pete,
>>>> On Jun 19, 2012, at 5:39 AM, "Zehler, Peter" <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com> wrote:
>> Xerox’s request from the Face to Face was to add a registered media-type
> name for cotton and I’d supply the details at a later time. Below are the
> semantic definitions for archival, bond and cotton media-type values we are
> proposing. The media weight (i.e. gsm range) can be ignored since the PWG
> does not include it in “media-type” definitions. I included it because it
> was available to me from production printing.
>>>> FWIW, we already have "stationery-bond" as a media type, and in general I
> would prefer to avoid mixing top-level and suffix names. More comments
> inline below...
>>>> New media-type values to register:
>> ‘archival’ - A tough, acid-free paper made with an alkaline buffer.
> Extraneous materials (such as sugars, starches and gums) in the pulp that
> can cause discoloring and deterioration, are carefully removed. Physical
> strength for the paper is ensured by using a long, high quality fibers such
> as cotton or flax that enables it to be usable for long periods. (gsm range
> 106-169)
>>>> Given that the existing photographic media type are often/typically
> archival-quality, would it make more sense to treat "archival" as a common
> suffix for existing top-level types, e.g.:
>>>> cardstock-archival
>> labels-archival
>> stationery-archival
>>>> ???
>>>> ‘bond’ - A better quality grade of paper that is stronger and more durable
> than ‘stationary’ (gsm range 81-130)
>>>> As I mentioned above, we already have stationery-bond.
>>>> ‘cotton’ - A rag pulp based paper which is made up of cotton fibers (gsm
> range 75-90)
>>>> Do we need a top-level for this too? "stationery-cotton" (and, if you think
> it is necessary, "cardstock-cotton") would seem to capture the existing
> usage for this type of media.
>>>> __________________________________________________
>> 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.
>> _______________________________________________
> ipp mailing list
>ipp at pwg.org>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp>
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.