# Re: Suggestions, and status of Microtek backend

Michael K. Johnson (johnsonm@redhat.com)
Sat, 08 Feb 1997 08:57:57 -0500

- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
- Next message: Stefano Gaffuri: "Re: XScan progress"
- Previous message: David Mosberger: "Re: Dumb Makefile.in question"

David Mosberger-Tang writes:
>Hmmh, so maybe what we should do is have a well-known, but
>non-mandatory "preview" option that tells the backend when preview
>quality is wanted. I really do not want to have the backend worry
>about an appropriate dpi setting for preview (unless there is some

Exactly! That's why I said, "...as well..." :-)

>Unless somebody has objections to this, I'll add it to the
>documentation (and saneopts.h).

Great. I don't know if the preview bit and the quality word actually
mean anything on my scanner, but I think that they do mean something
on some umax scanners... And someday I do want there to be a sane
backend for umax. I'm still working on the rewrite that will make that
reasonable to do, in my very limited spare time.

michaelkjohnson

"Ever wonder why the SAME PEOPLE make up ALL the conspiracy theories?"

- Next message: Stefano Gaffuri: "Re: XScan progress"
- Previous message: David Mosberger: "Re: Dumb Makefile.in question"