%%IncludeFeature

[Michael Sweet]

Anonymous wrote:
>>That said, the current release of CUPS supports %cupsJobTicket
>>comments at the beginning of a PS file, e.g.:
>>
>>     %!PS-Adobe-3.0
>>     %cupsJobTicket: option=value
>>     etc.
>>
>>The advantage of this approach is that you can use the generic
>>options instead of something specific to a particular printer...
> 
> 
> Ok, but that was the intended advantage of PPD in the first place.
> The example I used earlier, %%IncludeFeature: *Duplex DuplexNoTumble
> uses exactly the standard keyword and options from the PPD spec; it's
> the PPD's job to specify how that gets translated into something specific
> to the printer.  The question is, what's more generic, PPD standard or
> CUPS?  If I'm creating a file, is the file more portable/generic if it
> says %%IncludeFeature: *Duplex DuplexNoTumble or if it says
> %%cupsJobTicket: sides=two-sided-long-edge ?

sides=two-sided-long-edge handles PPD files that use older vendor
keywords like EFDuplex, etc.

> The first should work with any standard-conforming document manager from
> the last decade or so; the second works with CUPS.

Actually, I am not aware of any software that handles the
%%IncludeFeature comment; I *have* seen high-end printer/copier
devices that support it, though, but since you are using CUPS I
would stick with the cupsJobTicket stuff since it will work with
all printers and any recent version of CUPS (since 1.1.19 IIRC)

-- 
______________________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products           mike at easysw dot com
Printing Software for UNIX                       http://www.easysw.com