Status: Read
Received: from [207.176.88.85] by phillip.cerious.com (NTMail 3.03.0017/7.aaxh) with ESMTP id pcrews for <pcrews@cerious.com>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 11:25:11 -0500
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id KAA11457;
	Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:28:04 -0500
Received: by gate7.olympiakos.com (bulk_mailer v1.9); Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:26:32 -0500
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA11360
	for tiff-outgoing; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:26:32 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: gate7.olympiakos.com: majordom set sender to owner-tiff@olympiakos.com using -f
Received: from holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk (holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk [193.128.4.58])
	by gate7.olympiakos.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA11357
	for <tiff@olympiakos.com>; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 10:26:17 -0500
Received: from gpo.cam.harlequin.co.uk (gpo.cam.harlequin.co.uk [192.88.238.241])
          by holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP
	  id PAA21931; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:26:04 GMT
Received: from cronus.harlequin.com (cronus.cam.harlequin.co.uk [172.16.16.126])
          by gpo.cam.harlequin.co.uk (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP
	  id PAA20067; Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:26:03 GMT
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20001214151959.00be1ee0@192.88.238.241>
X-Sender: martinb@192.88.238.241
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:22:36 +0000
To: "Dan Smith" <d_smith@ecrm.com>, martinb@harlequin.co.uk
From: "Martin Bailey, Harlequin" <martinb@harlequin.co.uk>
Subject: Re(2): TIFF/IT
Cc: tiff@olympiakos.com
In-Reply-To: <fc.0064b57b00240ed53b9aca009f08ca94.240edf@ecrm.com>
References: <4.3.2.7.2.20001214135717.00d8fb30@192.88.238.241>
 <4.3.2.7.2.20001214135717.00d8fb30@192.88.238.241>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Sender: owner-tiff@olympiakos.com

<x-flowed>At 14:29 14/12/00, Dan Smith wrote:
>Am I right in assuming that the final ISO standard, like the draft, does
>not directly include the TIFF standard but incorporates it by reference?

That is correct.

>(Seems sort of weird to me that a standard could leave TIFF itself hanging
>out there in the air like that, but seemingly that's what they did...)

That's standard practice for standards, if you see what I mean.

In many cases it makes a lot of sense. To take an example the PDF/X-1 
standard refers to the PDF and PostScript reference manuals, the TIFF and 
TIFF/IT specs etc. To include copies of all of them within the body of the 
standard would lead to potential problems obtaining permission to do so, 
and to a spec that was two inches thick with stuff that you'd end up having 
multiple copies of anyway.



Regards

Martin Bailey

-------------------------------------------------------------
   Senior Technical Consultant  mailto:martinb@harlequin.com
   Digital Print & Publishing                +44 1223 873800
   Harlequin                        http://www.harlequin.com
-------------------------------------------------------------
If my views didn't usually coincide with those of my employer
  I wouldn't want to work here, but I am not a spokesman for
      Harlequin and the buck stops with me for what I say.
-------------------------------------------------------------

</x-flowed>
