> From rdebry at us.ibm.com Thu Feb 27 09:40:59 1997
> From: rdebry at us.ibm.com>> ... I'd suggest the following relative to the use of HTML
> and IPP:
>> A Web Browser must support HTML (pretty obvious)
>> An IPP Client must support IPP, and may optionally support HTML
>> An IPP Server must support IPP and may optionally support HTML.
>> I don't think that we can say that an IPP Server MUST support HTML in
> order to be IPP compliant. Actually sounds pretty silly to me to say that
> HTML is required to be IPP compliant! I don't think that this is an
> interoperability issue, is it?
Actually, we did say that an IPP server must support IPP AND HTML because
if HTML is optional, then a client which expects HTML, must have a fallback.
If clients must have a fallback to IPP, then no server need have HTML.
I think the primary issue is whether a server gives exactly the same
information and capabilities via IPP and HTML.