Subject: [IPP] Fwd: IPP definitions of staple and punch dimensions?

From: Ira McDonald <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 15:07:39 -0500

Hi,

Forwarding the conclusions from a recent off-list thread on IPP Staple
and Punch origins/angles/dimensions/etc.

Cheers,
- Ira

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Michael Sweet <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 1:34 PM
Subject: Re: IPP definitions of staple and punch dimensions?
To: "Kennedy, Smith" <[email-masked]>
Cc: Ira McDonald <[email-masked]>

Smith,

On Nov 9, 2015, at 1:09 PM, Kennedy, Smith <[email-masked]> wrote:

Even if we had "-supported" and "-default" I cannot imagine that a) the
attributes would be commonly used (likely would be hidden under an
"advanced" section in UI); and b) would usually be a very small set unless
the device is very capable.

Agreed.  (that's why I suggested possible xxx-configured attributes to
provide implementation details to the client, no xxx-supported or
xxx-default)

I want to document the current "design pattern" for attribute clusters,
because the shift from "xxx-default" / "xxx-supported" to "xxx-default" /
"xxx-configured" / "xxx-supported" is still a shift for me.

An errata that defines the intent would be OK by me.

A couple of follow-up questions from our firmware folks:

Given a top staple left of a portrait document, I can construct the
following diagram:

This is the top left of a page.
·         Center of staple is the intersection of line segment AB & GH.
·         Does this make the stitching offset the distance from the left
side of the document to the line segment GH?
·         Is the Process Axis line segment GH

Or
·         Is the Process Axis line segment CD
·         Offset is the distance from line segment CD to edge of page
·         Center is the projection of the staple’s physical center to the
line segment CD.

IMHO, the first is the right one.  Is there any concern with a portion of
the staple being between the process axis and the edge?  If that is an
issue that must be accounted for, punched holes would violate that as well,
much more egregiously than a staple that is parallel to the reference edge.

I agree that the first one is correct (or what I would expect, anyways... :)

As for the staple going over the edge, I'd guess the printer would limit
the supported stitching-locations and stitching-offset values to prevent
the staple from going off the edge.

Also, the snippet of CIP4 JDF below doesn't seem to specify a staple
rotation angle, which would be needed for making these calculations, unless
we were to use one end of the staple as the axis (which would be another
alternative for ensuring that none of the staple would intrude into the
space between the reference edge and process axis).

Also why do the specs assume the staples are parallel to the reference
edge, when in the case of single staples they are clearly angled?

Isn't this an informal convention? I am pretty sure I've seen different
implementations in the wild that place the corner staple parallel to either
the left or top edges.

Yes, the angle is implementation-defined but currently undiscoverable by
the Client to show the user...

(and FWIW most of the stapler finishers I've used have put the staples
parallel to an edge and not angled...)

_________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer
_______________________________________________
ipp mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp