My intent is that certain attributes be set by a Printer to the
most authentic value that a server can obtain. The operation
attributes are a possible source of these values. I would prefer
that the information come from something outside of the entity body.
If these attributes are settable by a client, then the Printer
doesn't know whether a trusted part of the client set them.
The operation attributes are useful because a client supplies them for
any operation including Print. Only with Print does a Printer possibly
copy those values into job attributes.
> From rdebry at us1.ibm.com Mon Nov 25 15:24:03 1996
> From: rdebry at us1.ibm.com> X400-Originator: rdebry at us1.ibm.com> X400-Recipients: non-disclosure:;
> X400-Mts-Identifier: [/ADMD=IBMSMTP/C=US/;5030100002247146000002]
> X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 (22)
> To: <robert.herriot at Eng>
> Cc: <ipp at pwg.org>
> Subject: IPP> job attributes et by Printer
> Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 10:12:48 -0500
> Sender: ipp-owner at pwg.org> Content-Length: 411
> X-Lines: 9
>> Bob, can you explain the rationale behind setting job information attributes
> such as notification address in the Printer, thus requiring a separate set of
> operation attributes to be defined to set them? I find this confusing. If the
> intent is that the client and not the end-user sets these attributes, can't
> this be taken care of in the implementation of the client code?