[cups.general] Error: No %%BoundingBox: comment in header!

Ambrose Li ambrose.li at gmail.com
Fri Mar 23 21:38:19 PDT 2007


On 24/03/07, Gene Heskett <gene.heskett at verizon.net> wrote:
> Besides, isn't the %%DocumentMedia comment a pdf spec rather than a ps
> spec?  I don't recall seeing that in the gs code the last time I walked
> around in it, but %%BoundingBox was all over the place, which was back
> about version 5.10 or so, building it on an amiga. (Now that gives away a
> hint as to my age I guess as I was about 60ish then) That had pdf in it,
> but the spec was then just barely at version 1.2 IIRC.  And it actually
> worked quite well if you had all the t's crossed and the i's properly
> dotted on the command line.  There have been megatons of changes since
> then, making it a whole lot more robust.

Yes, %%DocumentMedia is indeed PostScript; it's in DSC 3.0 (PSRM3
p. 658; G.6.1), and various incarnations of it in earlier versions of the DSC.
I was actually thinking of %%PaperSize, but checked my PSRM and found
that this is "discountinued" :-/  Have been out of touch with PostScript for a
long while.

As for %%BoundingBox, I did that myself too back in the days where one
can just hack up a Postscript driver for a word processor. It's easy (easier
than emitting strings from a lookup table of unknown size), it's more useful/
predictable (numbers vs. strings that have really never been standardized)
and you can't really fault people for giving a BBox that's too large :-)   So I
suppose it has become a de-facto standard but really it's kind of an abuse
of the comment.

-- 
cheers,
-ambrose

Gmail must die. Yes, I use it, but it still must die.
PS: Don't trust everything you read in Wikipedia. (Very Important)





More information about the cups mailing list