Re: [Printing-architecture] "no-color-management" not a good idea for a name of a boolean CUPS option

[Till Kamppeter <till.kamppeter@gmail.com>]

OK, Joseph.

Thank you to everyone to give your opinion.

   Till

On 06/12/2014 08:15 PM, Joseph Simon wrote:
> Hi Till,
> 
> I agree on the name change for the CUPs bool option.
> The name "cm-calibration" seems to make the most sense, and I will make
> the change in the filters.
> 
> Joe Simon
> 
> On Jun 12, 2014 3:12 AM, "Till Kamppeter" <till.kamppeter@gmail.com
> <mailto:till.kamppeter@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Hi,
> 
>     I have encountered a problem with the "no-color-management" and
>     cupsGetOption() not be able to recognize that the user has supplied "-o
>     no-color-management" on the command line.
> 
>     If you have an arbitrary boolean option in CUPS filters or backends,
>     like "xxx" the variants
> 
>        -o xxx
>        -o xxx=1
>        -o xxx=on
>        -o xxx=yes
>        -o xxx=true
> 
>     are supposed to let it be interpreted as set and
> 
>        -o noxxx
>        -o xxx=0
>        -o xxx=off
>        -o xxx=no
>        -o xxx=false
> 
>     let it be interpreted as not set. To support the "-o noxxx" case
>     cupsGetOption() seems to split a "no" in the beginning of the name off
>     if there is no '='. Therefore "no-color-management=" works but
>     "no-color-management" not. The latter is probably interpreted as
>     "-color-management=false".
> 
>     Mike, am I right with this?
> 
>     So I suggest something like "calibration-mode", "cm-calibration-mode",
>     "cm-calibration", or similar.
> 
>     WDYT?
> 
>        Till
>