🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan7.084540@mccall.com>, tp@mccall.com (Terry Poot) writes:
>
>In article <1993Jan7.131903.25423@slcs.slb.com>, brydon@asl.slb.com (Harvey
>Brydon (918)250-4312) writes:
>>The problem with Postscript level 1 is that extensions to the language were
>>required and I think existed on every printer ever made.  I may be wrong but I
>>believe that every level 2 printer I have seen does not have or need device
>>specific extensions ... so the conclusion in my opinion is that any symbiont
>>handling postscript level 2 printers should be able to do so without special
>>knowledge of the printer.  This is not the case with postscript level 1
>>printers.  
>
>Using PPD files gets around these problems even for level 1 printers, because
>the PPD files include a description of what capabilities are available, and
>Postscript code to invoke them. DEC could support just about anything by adding
>a PPD "compiler" and writing the support code just once. You can get PPD files
>for most printers from Adobe or the manufacturer, and you can write your own if
>you need to. 

Compatibility to Postscript level 1 is now a lost cause since level 2 is now
out and much more robust.  My point was that it should be possible to write
the symbiont to deal with postscript level 2 printers and no PPD files would
be necessary at all, since level 2 defines how the host gets papersize and
tray selection from the printer without having to resort to vendor-specific
postscript extensions.

>But even without the PPD files, supporting base capabilities and letting the
>user write custom setup modules to do other things covers what most people need
>quite well.

I agree that CPS would have been more robust if they didn't intentionally
brain damage it.
_______________________________________________________________
Harvey Brydon         | Internet:   brydon@dsn.SINet.slb.com
Dowell Schlumberger   | P.O.T.S.:   (918)250-4312
Don't knit your brows - someone may pull the wool over your eyes.