Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!know!login From: Steve Elias Newsgroups: comp.dcom.fax Subject: Re: 2-d encoding and padding EOL Message-ID: <22664@know.pws.bull.com> Date: 29 Mar 91 18:11:10 GMT Sender: login@pws.bulL.com Lines: 26 Sam Leffler writes: > To summarize *again* I feel there is an ambiguity as to how to > interpret padding EOL marks to byte boundaries when doing > 2-d encoding. Should the tag bit for the following row go in > the same byte with the last 7 bits of the EOL, or should it go > in the "next" byte? I know that several modem manufacturers > read this newsgroup and I'm just hoping to get an answer to > the question so that my fax+TIFF software will be consistent > with what they do. Sam, i'm no modem manufacturer and i'm no Kennedy, but it seems to me that there is indeed an ambiguity. why not just support both modes, with one as an option... like "-tageol" ?? this way, your faxTIFF code can be all things to all faxmodems! (sort of.) ; Steve Elias, eli@cisco.com ; 415 688 4517 (work phone & voice mail) ; 508 294 0101 (SCO Unix inbound fax->email)