Re: [Tuxpaint-devel] [fwd] tuxpaint print bug on Brother HL 2700 CN

[Micah J. C. <mi...@co...>]

On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 08:13:50PM -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote:
> On 8/18/06, Micah J. Cowan <mi...@co...> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 12:28:27AM -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote:
> 
> > Right. I want to go for the low-hanging fruit to see what the easiest
> > fix is that could cause it to start working for this user, before moving
> > onto more difficult challenges (such as trying to get BB working).
> >
> > AFAIK, for a single-page document such as this, with no fancy resource
> > management, there's probably no real need to follow the Adobe DSC. But
> > somehow it can make the code it look nicer. :-)
> >
> > I was wondering, though, why you chose to output it as an EPS... was
> > there thought down the road for generating files from this code?
> 
> There is a certain level I need to allow RGB output, and a certain
> level needed for an unimplemented sRGB-to-AdobeRGB transform.
> 
> As I recall, that level requires or strongly suggests the other stuff.
> 
> All too often I have encountered postscript files that don't work
> nicely in postscript viewers. It's nice to support all the extras
> needed for things to work well. I did that as best I could. I don't
> see a reason to be shipping EPS files around, but it is important
> that things work nicely for printers that may require the newer
> comments.

Oh... actually, the DSC comment stuff isn't supposed to be required,
and is a separate specification from PostScript. And, you can do it
without making it an EPS file (you just drop the stuff after
%!PS-Adobe-3.0).

Mostly, DSC is for caching stuff, so the printer doesn't waste
time/memory doing things more often than it has to.

...After doing some reading, AFAICT I was wrong about BoundingBox being
required: it would seem that this is probably not the cause of problems
on the user's printer.

What I think /might/ cause problems, is the fact that the %%BeginData
section includes a line with the word "image" on it, but doesn't include
those 6 bytes (including newline) in the specified byte count. I wonder
if moving that line before the %%BeginData section just might improve
things.

-- 
Micah J. Cowan
Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer...
http://micah.cowan.name/