01-att1.htm

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