RE: RFC 2534 list of ua-media and paper-size values

It doesn't seem reasonable to merge the values of HTML "media" and IPP
"media". The former describes media in a large sense. The latter desribes
media in the context of a printer.

I agree that all of the print related values of RFC 2534 should be
deprecated and that the word "print" should be used instead as a value of
"media"  It would be reasonable to add a new attribute "print-media" which
contains the values of the IPP "media" attribute.

Bob Herriot

-----Original Message-----
From: Al Gilman [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, October 15, 1999 9:34 PM
To: Larry Masinter; [email protected]
Cc: Conneg WG; Carl-Uno Manros; Bob Herriot; Johan Hjelm;
[email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: RE: RFC 2534 list of ua-media and paper-size values


At 02:28 PM 10/15/99 -0700, Larry Masinter wrote:
>Here's a cut at vocabulary alignment between HTML and RFC 2534.
>
>HTML screen: arguably the same as RFC2534 screen
>HTML tty: no analog; add this to RFC 2534
>HTML tv: combines several media features. I suggest changing RFC 2534
>         'screen-paged' to add "or which has limited scrolling
capabilities"
>         to "which cannot scroll", and then defining HTML tv as
>         'screen-paged', color=full and some description of
>         pix-x & pix-y
>HTML projection: is this a kind of 'screen'? Or we should register it? 

Close match to screen-paged.  But note that for projection one uses larger
fonts, so projection is an issue in itself.  See also

<http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/media.html#media-types>.

>HTML handheld: No media feature for "limited bandwidth"; maybe we need
>         some feature to describe size in bytes, e.g., 'docsize<2000' ?
>         otherwise (small screen, monochrome, bitmapped graphics)
>         corresponds to ua-media=screen,pix-x<200,pix-y<200,color=binary
>HTML print: sort of like 2534 stationery. In retrospect, I wonder about the
>         RFC 2534 distinction with 'transparency', 'envelope', 
>         'envelope-plain' is useful. I was trying to be compatible
>         with the printer mib, but it's not really "ua-media".
>         'continuous' might have been useful for fax if it really
>         denoted 'roll paper', but the definition there says
>         'continuously connected sheets of opaque material' which
>         makes it sound like it's paged.
>
>HTML braille, aural:  these aren't in RFC 2534, and probably should
>         be.
>
>If we add 'print', we could eliminate or deprecate 'stationery',
>'envelope', 'envelope-plain', 'transparency' and 'continuous' in
>favor of recognizing 'print', then the relationship with IPP is
>clearer, since most of the IPP media types are a kind of 'print'.
>
>Summary of changes to RFC 2534 UA-Media
>    add 'tty'
>    modify 'screen-paged' to note "or limited scroll capabilities"
>    add 'projection'
>    add 'print' as "any kind of printed material".
>    deprecate 'continous', 'transparency', 'envelope', and
'envelope-plain';
>      note that these are kinds of 'print'. Note that
>      continuous rolls might be noted as 'print' with no pix-y limit.
>    add 'braille' and 'aural' with the same definitions as in HTML 4.0.
>
>For alignment with IPP, we'll need to update RFC 2534 paper sizes
>(mainly adding values), add feature(s) for paper color(ed), and then
>describe IPP media primarily as "print". Maybe 'continuous',
>'transparency', 'envelope' and 'envelope-plain' are all parts
>of some (new) paper-type feature.
>