Hi John,
1) The MIME type for UIF data.
You raise an interesting question about using the
"image/tiff; application=[faxbw|faxcolor]" for UIF data, since in
some cases UIF is more or less stringent than the corresponding
TIFF-FX named profile. But the reason for using the SAME existing
MIME type is much more important than just Internet Fax gateways.
Everywhere that the UIF data is stored in a file on a repository and
tagged with the existing MIME type all EXISTING and DEPLOYED readers
and filters will work correctly with the data. Even a new keyword
value for the 'application' parameter will prevent interworking.
2) Replace "Sender" with "Client" and "Receiver" with "Host"
As Carl Kugler just pointed out EVERY internet connected device
is properly termed a host. Please replace "Receiver" with "Server".
Cheers,
- Ira McDonald, consulting architect at Sharp and Xerox
High North Inc
-----Original Message-----
From: John Pulera [mailto:jpulera@minolta-mil.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 12:45 PM
To: IPP-Fax Group
Subject: IFX> some UIF issues...thoughts anyone?
While revising the UIF spec, some issues have surfaced and it would be great
if we can generate some discussion on them:
1) The MIME type for UIF data.
From the IPPFAX teleconferences held on May 30 & June 6, there was
consensus to use "image/tiff; application=faxbw" and "image/tiff;
application=faxcolor". The primary argument for using these was that it is
the same MIME type used for Internet Fax, and so there would be less of a
conformance issue with an IPPFAX device serving as a gateway for Internet
Fax documents.
However...If we are going to make UIF a protocol-independent data
format (which was also agreed at the May 30 telecon), I do not think think
we should directly associate it with Internet Fax. Perhaps "image/tiff;
application=uif" would be a better compromise in that UIF would be made
independent of Internet Fax while existing TIFF readers can still do
something with the UIF data.
In addition, is it valid to use the same MIME type as Internet Fax
if the data requirements for UIF and TIFF-FX are not identical? (TIFF-FX is
more strict with resolutions and allowed image widths)
2) The use of the terms "Client" to mean the "Sender" and "Host" to mean the
"Receiver".
Is "Client" interchangeable with "Sender" and "Host" with "Receiver"?
Should we be using the more generic terms "Client" and "Host" instead of
"Sender" and "Receiver" in the UIF spec since the UIF spec is NOT
protocol-specific?
Does anyone have any thoughts on these issues?
Thanks,
John
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 08 2001 - 15:46:25 EDT