Re: Duplicate media sizes in registry...
Michael Sweet via ipp <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Benjamin, > On Oct 24, 2022, at 7:42 PM, Benjamin Gordon <[email protected]> wrote: > ... > I found another case that seems borderline: iso_id-1_53.98x85.6mm and > om_card_54x86mm (both added in > https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/registrations/canon-media-20180329.txt) > are technically not the same size, but the dimensions differ by <0.5mm > in both dimensions. I am inclined to deprecate om_card in favor of the ISO size. > CUPS treats them as the same size by default > because of this. Any thoughts on whether the CUPS behavior is correct > here? If it is then this is another duplicate. "Correct" vs. "pragmatic". They are technically different sizes, but given the production tolerances for this kind of media I suspect they are interchangeable. ________________________ Michael Sweet