Browse Prior Art Database

Guaranteed Printing Resource Identification

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000131159D
Publication Date: 2005-Nov-08
Document File: 2 page(s) / 79K

Publishing Venue

The IP.com Prior Art Database

Abstract

Networked printing resources (such as fonts) are assumed to have same appearance if they have the same file names. However, this is often not the case. File names have no relation to the file contents. This results in hardcopy whose appearance is not as intended by the originator, wasting time and paper. This invention describes a process to definitively identify a resource file by attaching a unique signature to the file's name. The proposed approach produces a signature that is appended to resource file name and is based on a hash of the content of the file. The signature appended to the file name can be readily verified by the electronic printing system by re-generating the hash and comparing it against the signature.

This text was extracted from a Microsoft Word document.
At least one non-text object (such as an image or picture) has been suppressed.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 52% of the total text.

Guaranteed Printing Resource Identification

Networked printing resources (such as fonts) are assumed to have same appearance if they have the same file names.  However, this is often not the case.  File names have no relation to the file contents.  This results in hardcopy whose appearance is not as intended by the originator, wasting time and paper.

This problem was corrected by manually validating the appearance of the resources available to the printing system.

This invention describes a process to definitively identify a resource file by attaching a unique signature to the file’s name.  The proposed approach produces a signature that is appended to resource file name and is based on a hash of the content of the file.  The signature appended to the file name can be readily verified by the electronic printing system by re-generating the hash and comparing it against the signature.  An example of a file name with an appended signature might be as follows:

            Arial.ttf.5BF3AA0f18C076CC

The algorithm used to generate the signature is immaterial (the MD5 algorithm is NOT recommended); the only requirement is that the same method used to generate the original signature in the file name is used to re-generate it by the electronic file system.  If the re-generated signature matches the one specified in the print job, then the user can be confident that the resource being used is the same.  The file’s name is now based on the file’s content.

a workflow where this process might be used is in printing a document that requires resources (i.e. font resources).

For example, a document is created specifying the signed font file name as the source of the resource.  When the document is sent to the printing system as part of a print job, the resource data may be included or it may already be available on the printing system.  In either case, the printing system should verify that the resource data hashes to the same signature value as that in the resource file name specified in the document.  If they do not match, the resource data is not the same as...