idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-conneg-media-features-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Cannot find the required boilerplate sections (Copyright, IPR, etc.) in this document. Found some kind of copyright notice around line 27 but it does not match any copyright boilerplate known by this tool. Expected boilerplate is as follows today (2024-04-23) according to https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info : IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.a: This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.b(i), paragraph 2: Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.b(i), paragraph 3: This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Missing expiration date. The document expiration date should appear on the first and last page. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about Internet-Drafts being working documents. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of current Internet-Drafts. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of Shadow Directories. == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard == The page length should not exceed 58 lines per page, but there was 1 longer page, the longest (page 1) being 236 lines Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a Security Considerations section. ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) ** The document seems to lack separate sections for Informative/Normative References. All references will be assumed normative when checking for downward references. ** There is 1 instance of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 3 characters in excess of 72. ** There is 1 instance of lines with control characters in the document. ** The abstract seems to contain references ([FPIM], [PRINTMIB], [TIFF], [REG], [MDN], [MIB]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (March 11, 1998) is 9540 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Missing Reference: 'PRINTMIB' is mentioned on line 126, but not defined ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 1759 (ref. 'MIB') (Obsoleted by RFC 3805) == Outdated reference: A later version (-03) exists of draft-ietf-conneg-feature-reg-00 -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. 'MDN' -- No information found for draft-ietf-fax-tiff-reg-XX - is the name correct? -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. 'TIFF' -- Unexpected draft version: The latest known version of draft-ietf-fax-fpim is -01, but you're referring to -02. (However, the state information for draft-ietf-fax-tiff-reg-XX is not up-to-date. The last update was unsuccessful) -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. 'FPIM' Summary: 12 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 5 warnings (==), 7 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 INTERNET-DRAFT Larry Masinter 2 draft-ietf-conneg-media-features-00.txt Koen Holtman 3 Andy Mutz 4 Dan Wing 5 expires in 6 months March 11, 1998 7 Media Features for Display, Print, and Fax 9 Status of this memo 11 This document is an Internet-Draft. Internet-Drafts are working 12 documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, 13 and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute 14 working documents as Internet-Drafts. 16 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 17 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 18 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 19 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 21 To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the 22 "1id-abstracts.txt" listing contained in the Internet-Drafts Shadow 23 Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), ftp.nordu.net (Europe), 24 munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim), ds.internic.net (US East Coast), or 25 ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast). 27 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1997). All Rights Reserved. 29 Abstract 31 This specification defines some common media features for describing 32 image resolution, size, color, and image representation methods that 33 are common to web browsing, printing, and facsimile applications. 34 These features are registered for use within the framework of [REG]. 36 Introduction 38 This work was originally motivated by the requirements from web 39 browsers to send the browser's display characteristics to the web 40 server to allow the server to choose an appropriate representation. 42 This specification defines some common media features [REG] by which a 43 recipient may inform a sender as to the characteristics of its message 44 handling. The sender may then provide the variant of the message that 45 is most suitable for the recipient. 47 Different variants would typically be higher or lower resolution 48 images (for example) as appropriate. In the case of a sending to a 49 printer, the result would be higher quality output. In the case of a 50 small screen device (cellphone, portable digital assistant), the 51 result would be faster transmission. 53 Media features may be used in many different protocol situations. 54 Those defined in this specification can indicate the display or 55 printer dimensions (in pixels), display resolution (in pixels/inch), 56 color capability and bit-depth, display media type, or . The physical 57 dimensions of the display can be inferred from the display size and 58 display resolution. In the case of paper output, the paper size may be 59 expressed as a token from a list of certain standard paper sizes. 60 These are presented formally in the Notation section. 62 pix-x (integer) 63 pix-y (integer) 65 These features indicate the display size of the recipient for 66 display or print, measured in pixels; they indicate horizontal 67 (pix-x) and vertical (pix-y) dimensions. 69 res (integer) 71 This feature indicates a resolution that the recipient can display 72 or print without loss, measured in pixels per inch. Certain 73 resources such as images may have similar total pixel size but 74 differing data size and quality depending on degree of compression. 76 Note: While English units are not universal, it is preferable to 77 avoid multiple unit definitions. Equivalent metric definitions 78 are available. 80 res-x (integer) 81 res-y (integer) 83 In cases where non-square aspect ratio is supported, these features 84 can be used for specifying horizontal (res-x) and vertical (res-y) 85 resolution capabilities. 87 UA-media (token) 89 This feature indicates the recipients device media, indicated with 90 an simple token. All (except for "screen" and "screen-paged") are 91 taken from the Printer MIB MediaType set defined in RFC 1759 [PRINTMIB]. 92 Other tokens may be registered and used as needed. 94 They are defined as: 95 screen A refreshable display 96 screen-paged a refreshable display which cannot scroll 98 stationery Separately cut sheets of an opaque material 99 transparency Separately cut sheets of a transparent material 100 envelope Envelopes that can be used for conventional 101 mailing purposes 102 envelope-plain Envelopes that are not preprinted and have no 103 windows 104 envelope-window Envelopes that have windows for addressing 105 purposes 106 continuous-long Continuously connected sheets of an opaque 107 material connected along the long edge 108 continuous-short Continuously connected sheets of an opaque 109 material connected along the short edge 110 tab-stock Media with tabs 111 multi-part-form Form medium composed of multiple layers not 112 pre-attached to one another; each sheet may be 113 drawn separately from an input source 114 labels Label stock 115 multi-layer Form medium composed of multiple layers which 116 are pre-attached to one another; e.g., for 117 use with impact printers" 119 papersize (token) 121 For stationery, it is often useful to have information about the 122 size of display used. While it is more precise and predictable to 123 use absolute resolution and pixel sizes, some applications find it 124 useful to provide paper size in lieu of or in addition to this 125 information. Paper sizes names and definitions are taken from RFC 126 1759 [PRINTMIB], which in turn imported the definitions from 127 ISO/IEC 10175: 129 Examples of paper size tokens, with names from [MIB], are: 130 na-letter: 8.5x11.0 inches 131 iso-A4: 210x297 mm 132 iso-B4: 250x353 mm 133 iso-A3: 297x420 mm 134 na-legal: 8.5x14 inches 136 color (integer) 137 grey (integer) 139 The color capabilities of the recipient are indicated with feature 140 tag and a parameter describing the number of color channel bits 141 available. Values of n are typically (but not limited to) 2, 8, or 142 24. For example: grey=8 indicates a display capable of 143 representing an image in 256 levels of a single color, while 144 color=8 indicates a display capable of representing an image with a 145 palette of 256 colors. 147 tiff (token) 149 The ability to process Internet Media type image/tiff application 150 profiles, defined by [TIFF]. If additional feature tags are given 151 for describing resolution, media sizes and so forth, they are added 152 to those application profiles. This feature is important for Internet 153 Fax [FPIM], [MDN]. 155 Examples of use of features 157 The following examples of feature comparison show how these features 158 can be used to describe various capabilities: 159 pix-x<=1024, pix-y<=768 160 indicates a 1024x768 display 162 res<=72 163 indicates a 72 dpi display 165 UA-media=stationery 166 indicates the display is a cut sheet of opaque material, such as 167 paper. 169 papersize=iso-a4 170 indicates the display size is 210x297mm. 172 color<=24 173 indicates the display supports 24-bit (8-bit/channel) color. 175 papersize=na-letter,res-x={204,200,300},res-y={98,196,100},tiff=F 176 might be used for a fax machine with 'simple mode'. 177 papersize=na-letter,res-x<=400,res-y<=400,tiff={M,J} 178 might be used for a fax machine with enhanced capabilities. 180 Acknowledgments 182 This document is based on a previous draft co-authored with Lou 183 Montoulli. It had benefited from the comments of Graham Klyne, Ho 184 John Lee, Brian Behlendorf, and Jeff Mogul. 186 References 188 [MIB] R. Smith, F. Wright, T. Hastings, S. Zilles, J. 189 Gyllenskog. "Printer MIB." RFC 1759, March 1995. 191 [REG] K. Holtman, A. Mutz. "Feature Tag Registration Procedures", 192 draft-ietf-conneg-feature-reg-00.txt, March 1998. 194 [MDN] D. Wing, L. Masinter, "Using Message Disposition 195 Notifications to Indicate Capabilities", 196 draft-ietf-fax-mdn-features-01.txt, March 1998. 198 [TIFF] Parsons, G., Rafferty, J., and S. Zilles, "Tag Image File 199 Format (TIFF) - image/tiff MIME Sub-type Registration", Work in 200 Progress, Internet Draft, draft-ietf-fax-tiff-reg-XX.txt. 202 [FPIM] L. Masinter, D. Wing, "Extended Mode of Facsimile Using 203 Internet Mail", draft-ietf-fax-fpim-02.txt, March, 1998. 205 Author's Addresses 207 Larry Masinter 208 Xerox Palo Alto Research Center 209 3333 Coyote Hill Road 210 Palo Alto CA 94304 211 Fax +1 415 812 4333 212 Email: masinter@parc.xerox.com 214 Dan Wing 215 Cisco Systems, Inc. 216 101 Cooper Street 217 Santa Cruz, CA 95060 USA 218 Phone: +1 408 457 5200 219 Fax: +1 408 457 5208 220 EMail: dwing@cisco.com 222 Andrew H. Mutz 223 Hewlett-Packard Company 224 1501 Page Mill Road 3U-3 225 Palo Alto CA 94304, USA 226 Fax +1 415 857 4691 227 Email: mutz@hpl.hp.com 229 Koen Holtman 230 Technische Universiteit Eindhoven 231 Postbus 513 232 Kamer HG 6.57 233 5600 MB Eindhoven (The Netherlands) 234 Email: koen@win.tue.nl