At 15:01 03/10/97 PST, Don Wright wrote:
>>I have a real problem with this because 99.99% of the printing
>done today does not provide this kind a functionality. Late
>binding is a concept that exists in none of the major operating
>systems and only in certain packages like Dazel. Additionally,
>while the protocol may support this type of function, it is not
>in our area to tell application writers what functions are to be
>exposed to the user.
I agree (with you and Bob). What I was trying to suggest was a
requirement for our requirements document that our IPP protocol would
We can define a model and a protocol
>mapping that is neutral as to the source of the job but beyond
>that it is really up to the implementors of the user interface,
>the print server and the printer as to whether the things you
>ask for are implemented or every possible.
>>I really think this is more "fat" being added to IPP. As we
>discussed briefly on last week's conference call, this is all
>becoming way to heavy. We really need to start thinking about
>a real minimal implementation requirement with functionality
>like the Microsoft proposal with (I hate to say this so you IPDS
>guys cover your ears) "towers" of functionality that can be
>negotiated between the submitter and the server. We have got
>to cut this down to what is really necessary and focus on getting
>that done and implemented ASAP!!!
I agree with this as well. So I'm not proposing adding more stuff
(except the page-select that was deleted recently, but is something that
you can do from current applications and that you can do with .PDF PDL
today. So I don't want to add anything else (except to add back what
we had in our original proposal).
What stuff would you like to see removed from our current draft?
>>To: ipp%pwg.org @ interlock.lexmark.com @ SMTP
>cc: (bcc: Don Wright)
>From: hastings%cp10.es.xerox.com @ interlock.lexmark.com (Tom Hastings) @ SMTP
>Date: 03/10/97 11:55:44 AM
>Subject: IPP> REQ - ISSUE - Add a requirement that printing files have same
>capabilites as printing from an application
>>One of the requirements that we should add relates the functionality that
>a user has available over a file or document that has already been produced
>(usually be a different user) as compared with the functionality that
>a user has when printing from an application that generates the PDL on
>the fly (using the platform's GDI and printer driver).
>>The web has shifted the printing paradigm from mainly printing from current
>running applications to a more balanced approach between two printing
>paradigms: printing from the application and printing from a previously
>produced document or file.
>>We need to be striving to provide the same functionality to the end-user
>for both printing paradigms with IPP.
>>So I suggest adding a requirement something like:
>> IPP shall provide the same functionality to the end-user for print
> time choices of stored documents as the end-user has for printing
> directly from an application.
>> For example, the user can choose number of copies, two-sided, stapling,
> number-up, and page ranges, etc. whether printing from the application
> that has the entire document or printing from a file or document that
> has been stored on the web or in a document repository.