We seem to have a bit of confusion about what the scenarios are all about.
There seems to be two camps here:
1) Let us limit the scenarios to the functionality in version 1 of IPP, and
worry about extending them later.
2) We should get a more complete set of scenarios to know where we are
heading, not only for version 1 of IPP, but also beyond, to improve our
ability foresee where we might need flexibility in the protocol for future
In an earlier message, I advocated to make detailed scenarios for what is
needed in version 1, but also OUTLINE some of the functionality that we
might require beyond version 1. (This is more or less what we have in our
requirements document right now).
If that approach leads to too much discussion and confusion in the group,
we need to limit our immediate work to case 1) scenarios, that will be
explicitly covered short term. Maybe this is the only chance to move
forward within our planned schedule.
Remember that the intent of the scenarios was to make our protocol
specification work easier, not more difficult.
I want you to think about this urgently, so that we can reach concensus and