Hi Harry,
The assumption is that the IAB (Internet Activities Board, parent of IESG)
will settle their licensing issues with Adobe during the same (next several
months) time frame. A plausible reading of the original license (in my
personal opinion) is that they SHOULD have already defined the second MIME
type, because image/tiff with color profiles is NOT correctly consumed by
many (most?) non-IFax readers. In any case, the IAB are clearly directing
that the second MIME type is the minimum necessary solution.
The IFax WG members are very much opposed to separating TIFF-FX into two
different RFCs.
WARNING - every IFax product that has already shipped with color/multi-layer
profiles is going to be broken by this new MIME type, so IPP Fax is lucky
to have avoiding this debacle.
Cheers,
- Ira
-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Lewis [mailto:harryl@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 2:28 PM
To: McDonald, Ira
Cc: 'ifx@pwg.org'
Subject: Re: IFX> FW: option 5 for TIFF-FX [one document/two MIME types]
And this is expected to satisfy the licensing issues?
----------------------------------------------
Harry Lewis
IBM Printing Systems
----------------------------------------------
"McDonald, Ira" <IMcDonald@crt.xerox.com>
Sent by: owner-ifx@pwg.org
10/10/2001 09:24 AM
To: "'ifx@pwg.org'" <ifx@pwg.org>
cc:
Subject: IFX> FW: option 5 for TIFF-FX [one document/two MIME
types]
Hi,
Here's the request from Hiroshi Tamura (Ricoh, co-chair of
IETF Internet Fax WG) to the editors of the TIFF-FX spec to
work on a quick turnaround (before the Internet-Drafts
deadline for the IETF December 2001 meeting) on a new version
with all TIFF-FX profiles in one document but TWO different
MIME types:
- image/tiff - Profiles S and F (b/w only) - existing MIME type
- image/tifx - all other profiles - new MIME type to be registered
Cheers,
- Ira McDonald
High North Inc
-----Original Message-----
From: Hiroshi Tamura [mailto:tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp]
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 6:06 AM
To: ietf-fax@imc.org
Cc: Claudio.Allocchio@garr.it
Subject: Re: option 5 for TIFF-FX
Folks,
> As you already know, there are lots for favors for option 5.
> Therefore, the conlusion is "option 5"
<snip>
> I think TIFF-FX editors and the people who support it should provide
> somthing at first. Please do it.
No mails so far. I comment it.
At first, we need new two or more I-Ds.
- Revised tiff-fx document
- New or Revised registration document for image/tiff or/and
new MIME type.
At least, those documents should be available prior to December IETF
meeting.
The sooner, the better.
Next, implementation tests.
According to the I-Ds or revised I-Ds after getting some consensus
at the meeting or in our ML, the tests should be done.
New MIME type tests must be included.
It may be better to include the test for Profile S and F
with the use of image/tiff.
At the earliest, they will be done in January or February, I think.
After that, the final I-Ds will be availble.
License issues should be clarified in parallel.
Again,
TIFF-FX editors and the people who support it should comment for it.
Regards,
-- Hiroshi Tamura, Co-chair of IETF-FAX WG E-mail: tamura@toda.ricoh.co.jp
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 11 2001 - 11:12:58 EDT