Quality evaluation needs test targets/documents, and eyeballs.
I think you mean "trained eyeballs" above.
;)
There are already sample regression tests in RH bugzilla for page
size/resolution. All these fancy color-calibration mechanisms in
gnome/cups/ghostscript are useless for me unless one-color printing is
first correct (ie page size/resolution).
Although, clearly you'd want color tests too.
Many
test targets are free or easily produced and could be CC0 licensed or
something reasonable. This is something I've briefly discussed with
Richard Hughes, and also participants in OpenICC, that are needed not
just for print, but also for display.
Yes.
> be updated? I would love it if issues like "what driver am
I using"
> could be re-integrated into the UI, or perhaps an admin level of the
> ui. Also, "what filters did I run to get to this point of output"
> in a log file.
This is useful. At least on OS X each PDF print job also has a job
ticket. I think this is a CUPS thing. Even once the job is complete,
and the original document and raster files are deleted, the job
ticket remains and it should contain all of this information. Making
it more readable somehow might be useful.
Even making it accessible via admin-level UI's would be a great start.
I'm not seeing any kind of filter list in the localhost:631 ui on linux.
As for using Mac OS as a model for print dialogs, I'm happy to
discuss exactly what areas I think this is useful and areas it's to
be avoided. OS X for professional printing is nothing short of a
clusterf|ck. It has been a huge PITA for me for ~8 years.
LOL. Agreed. 20 years. Linux clearly has the capability to be much
better.
It's exciting to see the cups upgrade + texlive 2012 hit fedora! This
is gonna make fedora really compelling for content creation and viz.
-benjamin