>>I support Scott's view. Let's keep moving down the path we are on -- get the
>protocol right,
>then do whatever mappings we think are appropriate as a second step. I don;t
>think that we
>could standardize on the Microsoft approach because they are passing
>Microsoft
>internal
>data structures around.
>>>Yes. but that's happenig only in one case, and it only contains user id and a
>couple of other basic job properties. It would take me at most 15 minutes of
>coding to change that structure to its IPP equivalent.
>>Babak