IFX Mail Archive: RE: IFX> UIF spec has been updated: 'uif-s

RE: IFX> UIF spec has been updated: 'uif-spec-04'

From: Hastings, Tom N (hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com)
Date: Mon May 21 2001 - 19:33:33 EDT

Next message: Hastings, Tom N: "IFX> IPP FAX telecon agenda, Wed, May 30, 10-12 PDT (1-3 EDT)"

Previous message: Hastings, Tom N: "RE: IFX> default conneg & more detailed UIF profile summary"
Maybe in reply to: John Pulera: "IFX> UIF spec has been updated: 'uif-spec-04'"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

John,

Lloyd McIntyre called me with some comments on the original paper:

1. Section 4.1, "scaling". He was concerned about the "scaling" attribute,
since he felt that a Printer MUST NOT apply scaling, unless the client
explicitly allowed it. This would mean that we shouldn't define a
"scaling-default" that would allow the Printer to apply scaling, when the
client didn't explicitly allow it. In the definition, we should also make
it clearer that the attribute is the client allowing the Printer to perform
scaling.

2. Section 4.1, "scaling". In answer to your question:
The scaling is calculated separately for each page. (ISSUE: What should be
done concerning media selection when the TIFF image sizes are different on a
page by page basis? Either determine media size by media size attribute or
let the receiver determine for itself the media to be used on each page.)

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
/>He felt that the scaling decision made by the Printer (provided the client
allows it at all), should be made by the Printer for each page, given the
size of the image and the media size specified in the TIFF body for each
page and the medium that the Printer was going to print on for each page.
So far, the client can only specify the media for the document as a whole
using IPP attributes. (Presumably, we're not ready for the "page-exception"
(collection) attribute that would allow the client to specify the media for
page ranges, right?).

3. He suggested that we should pick a more user-friendly attribute name,
than "uif-conneg", perhaps, something like, "uif-capabilities", or
"uif-receiver-capabilities" or "uif-printer-capabilities".

4. He'll try to read your white paper with the CONNEG basic requirements for
each profile on the plane to Brazil (ITU meeting) and send us some comments.
I have him the URL at:

ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/QUALDOCS/white-sheets/default_conneg_etc-th-commen
ts.pdf
<ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/QUALDOCS/white-sheets/default_conneg_etc-th-comme
nts.pdf>
ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/QUALDOCS/white-sheets/default_conneg_etc-th-commen
ts.doc
<ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/QUALDOCS/white-sheets/default_conneg_etc-th-comme
nts.doc>

He'll be back in three weeks. In the meantime, if we have questions, we can
contact Rob Buckley, who is also a co-author of the TIFF/FX spec.

Thanks,
Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: John Pulera [mailto:jpulera@minolta-mil.com]
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2001 17:19
To: IPP-Fax Group
Subject: IFX> UIF spec has been updated: 'uif-spec-04'

-----------------------------------------
John Pulera
Minolta Systems Laboratory
111 Innovation Dr. Ste 200
Irvine, CA 92612
jpulera@minolta-mil.com <mailto:jpulera@minolta-mil.com>
(949)737-4520 x348

Next message: Hastings, Tom N: "IFX> IPP FAX telecon agenda, Wed, May 30, 10-12 PDT (1-3 EDT)"
Previous message: Hastings, Tom N: "RE: IFX> default conneg & more detailed UIF profile summary"
Maybe in reply to: John Pulera: "IFX> UIF spec has been updated: 'uif-spec-04'"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon May 21 2001 - 19:33:53 EDT