From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4C80AB6B.10202@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2010 10:01:47 +0200 From: Till Kamppeter MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4C809328.300@ac-orleans-tours.fr> In-Reply-To: <4C809328.300@ac-orleans-tours.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Printing-architecture] New PDF file format in CUPS List-Id: Printing architecture under linux List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stephane Ascoet Cc: printing-architecture@lists.linux-foundation.org On 09/03/2010 08:18 AM, Stephane Ascoet wrote: > > Hi, I've just learned about the replacement of PS by PDF in the store file language. I wonder if this wouldn't cause unecessary > conversions if the printer is Postscript. The application send the job in PS, CUPS store it in PDF and send it in PS to the printer? > Why having not chosen Postscript level 3 for storage? > Note that the PS->PDF->PS conversion is only temporary. The applications are supposed to output PDF in the future. Many already do, as all KDE applications, some GTK applications (like evince) and from the next release on also OpenOffice.org. The advantage of using PDF is mainly the smaller files, the possibility to reliably tell the pages apart (for printing selected pages, N-up, reverse order, ...), and the support for color management. PostScript, even level 3, does not give these advantages. See also https://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/openprinting/pdfasstandardprintjobformat especially the Introduction and the section 'Related bugs and feature requests'. Till