Path: csiph.com!feeder.erje.net!2.us.feeder.erje.net!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!panix!not-for-mail From: rodd@panix.com (Rod Dorman) Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript Subject: Re: Postscript level 1 and DSC Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 19:56:17 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Public Access Networks Corp. Lines: 26 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: panix2.panix.com X-Trace: reader2.panix.com 1470081377 10120 166.84.1.2 (1 Aug 2016 19:56:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 19:56:17 +0000 (UTC) X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001) Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.postscript:2717 In article , wrote: >I am parsing Postscript file to validate it. I first start with level 1. The >specifications say that it is possible to have minimal conforming, that is : > > - some DSC comments are requested > - the version identifier begins with the string '%!PS-Adobe-' > >So it says only *begins with* this string, and not *is exactly* this string. > >My question is: is minimal conforming specified inside the postscript file >in some way, or else should my parser be configured by the user to respect >minimal conformance ? Where in the original PLRM are you reading this? Is it in Appendix C Structuring Conventions? That's been split out into its own document now, PostScript Language. Document Structuring. Conventions Specification https://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/en/ps/5001.DSC_Spec.pdf It describes DSC version 3.0 with a version identifier %!PS-Adobe-3.0 -- -- Rod -- rodd(at)polylogics(dot)com