Kenneth Tindle wrote:
> Look folks, yes, Postscript is complex. But printers do not eat
> Postscript and interpret it by black magic! They use software to
> do it- so, if one could mirror that software externally, you could
> indeed produce a true page count- "true" being simply "how printer
> X would react to the same data."
The main problem with this method is that postscript programs
are allowed to ask what kind of interpreter they are on - there
are good and valid reasons for being able to do that. Even if
the interpreter could be cajoled into lying to the program I
doubt very much if one could emulate it exactly - there would
still be subtle differences that a postscript program could
exploit.
Our method is make it clear that cheaters will be dealt with.
> What would be truly interesting- have a real, live Postscript file
> that would produce one page on printer A and 200 on printer B. This
This is easy to do - trivial almost.
...
> Remember, it isn't magic!
True, but it's very obscure. Try to get any meaningful
information from the vendors and you'll see what I mean.
Jim
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
YOU MUST BE A LIST MEMBER IN ORDER TO POST TO THE LPRNG MAILING LIST
The address you post from MUST be your subscription address
If you need help, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (or lprng-requests
or lprng-digest-requests) with the word 'help' in the body. For the impatient,
to subscribe to a list with name LIST, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with: | example:
subscribe LIST <mailaddr> | subscribe lprng-digest [EMAIL PROTECTED]
unsubscribe LIST <mailaddr> | unsubscribe lprng [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you have major problems, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word
LPRNGLIST in the SUBJECT line.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
