IPP Mail Archive: Re: SM> Re: IPP> 4 significant proposed

Re: SM> Re: IPP> 4 significant proposed increases in conformance requirements for the IPP Document object spec

From: Mike Sweet (mike@easysw.com)
Date: Sat Apr 19 2003 - 23:14:06 EDT

Next message: McDonald, Ira: "RE: [SPAM] RE: IPP> 4 significant proposed increases in conforman ce requirem ents for the IPP Document object spec"

Previous message: Mike Sweet: "Re: [SPAM] RE: IPP> 4 significant proposed increases in conformance requirem ents for the IPP Document object spec"
In reply to: McDonald, Ira: "RE: SM> Re: IPP> 4 significant proposed increases in conformance requirements for the IPP Document object spec"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

McDonald, Ira wrote:
> ...
> 2) I agree that PDL override is hard to implement (in _some_ PDLs), but
> what Tom and I have proposed is to disambiguate _which_ attributes
> (if any) can be guaranteed to successfully override the PDL. Seems
> to me like a good clarity enhancement to IPP.

PDL override is not even well-defined; what do you do with a PDF file
that was formatted for a different media size? Scale it? Center it?
Crop it? What constitutes an override???

-- 
______________________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products                  mike@easysw.com
Printing Software for UNIX                       http://www.easysw.com

Next message: McDonald, Ira: "RE: [SPAM] RE: IPP> 4 significant proposed increases in conforman ce requirem ents for the IPP Document object spec"
Previous message: Mike Sweet: "Re: [SPAM] RE: IPP> 4 significant proposed increases in conformance requirem ents for the IPP Document object spec"
In reply to: McDonald, Ira: "RE: SM> Re: IPP> 4 significant proposed increases in conformance requirements for the IPP Document object spec"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 19 2003 - 23:22:30 EDT