RFC: Sorting preferences for MSN 2.1 size tables
Michael Sweet via ipp <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
All,
This question came up during our review of the MSN 2.1 at the face-to-face meeting. Basically, the current media size tables have inconsistent ordering. The original specification (MSN 1.0) sorted the sizes by width and then length. The 2.0 version added tables that are sorted by the media size name.
What ordering do people prefer for media sizes? Sort by the PWG media size name ("na_letter_8.5x11in" comes after "na_legal_8.5x14in") or by dimensions ("na_letter_8.5x11in" comes *before* "na_legal_8.5x14in")?
Please let me know your preference by June 15, 2023 so I can put out a new draft of the MSN specification.
________________________
Michael Sweet
_______________________________________________
ipp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 833 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEkIbDzcZsP1Y8+PQFvmfHXsgfMkQFAmR46K0ACgkQvmfHXsgf MkSfig/8DKeCT+iKLiPC4LirzpZQEb013ulewkq+YMPj2XTj2CKkJFz0S4PBcGdd E1GuHGArvPmHkoWwZevpYKIz+HEHf4p5+TJc3jRknX14Z6p1YUHd7vT4tMntXTSf xdBuglW/6/D94jNax9fpgu3EOhtxSoo7FDWSNJCl6Vm4k2awmj1bjIIAD3Tir+MP roZsAS7o+m6iK1PeJK1UT+fN5FLHDKPbB2uvax9rtHsZfP/JDUXBT+GUpQjAyZdH U59rG1JCtkAT/0xtkanQCf0Y+3zgWEZmgoR4eu6ADbBJ7Uc+R7lz2buJfhSy09im azig5MFckStX7yqSRDqE7g1B+DgdFDt4gAxSHRL5yqiJXZqujUmyKmAYqr86Oj7H Sxb1dfFPpFrF8p4cXfweOO82vmO0F55k8CFVrBPa8pOL3oersevG3W89L5z1EnHi uHi/pLV089UX+NrmxzmiEKuSJtDfdr8AGb3m1PtykDceq0g7iIDDhL23Vv+5R/HK FDQV42sP0fzi6Vg/Qgm1GjuvgRCdYRpz1soQYkui7vOBvkACZcQRfsrpnUyYqWf/ 2GqPjfux9PnVn2XveYBztdlNRl6ZutSCFemyV0m5X+8t/KJ92wBeK1Hq52BPxmnj sz4weFaSsLg9Z/pk0aIxmcPw4wue8fgC6/ZkcMTC6GaRZCiCOuY= =VzmI -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----