Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ippserver : Add support for attributes varying according to document format #48

Open
wifiprintguy opened this issue Sep 6, 2017 · 1 comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Milestone

Comments

@wifiprintguy
Copy link
Contributor

Some printers support different attributes depending on the document format being used. The Printer may limit the set of attributes reported by Get-Printer-Attributes when the operation request includes a "document-format" operation attribute , and a Client can use that to present the filtered set of choices once it has selected a document format. Similarly, the Printer may accept or reject a job creation operation request depending on whether a particular attribute is legitimate for a particular document format.

Currently there is no way to express such variances within a single Printer provided by ippserver. Separate Printers can be configured but those don't properly demonstrate this aspect of IPP.

Such an addition would require an extension to the ippserver's Print Service Configuration File format. One notion might be to adopt a convention from the venerable CUPS "ppdc" / "ppdcfile" system, which supported model variants that were delimited based on "curly bracket encapsulation" to indicate their scope.

@michaelrsweet michaelrsweet self-assigned this Sep 6, 2017
@michaelrsweet michaelrsweet added this to the Future milestone Sep 6, 2017
@michaelrsweet michaelrsweet added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 6, 2017
@michaelrsweet
Copy link
Contributor

I can't see using the ppdc format, which doesn't even support this sort of thing...

Putting in the Future milestone (not 1.0) for now, as I'm not sure how to best support this...

@michaelrsweet michaelrsweet removed their assignment Mar 22, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants