IPP>MOD - conformance -Reply

IPP>MOD - conformance -Reply

IPP>MOD - conformance -Reply

Roger K Debry rdebry at us.ibm.com
Tue Apr 15 11:41:24 EDT 1997


Classification:
Prologue:
Epilogue: Roger K deBry
Senior Techncial Staff Member
Architecture and Technology
IBM Printing Systems
email: rdebry at us.ibm.com
phone: 1-303-924-4080


> - shall respond with an empty value for each attribute that it does not
>    recognize.
>
>       Issue: Should there be an attribute value of "unsupported" to
>        better indicate this?




Wouldn't it be better to return nothing at all?   For some of the attributes
that have a non-keyword or text syntax, it might be a little more
difficult to parse an integer "12" and/or "unsupported".  Doesn't just
not returning anything imply unsupprted?


RKD> I think this would be okay as long as returning nothing at all
RKD> is unambigous.  Are there any other circumstances that would
RKD> result in returning nothing?




>         Issue: Should a return code indicate that the job was rejected
>         because an unsupported attribute value was specified?


Yes, but NOT return a list of the attributes (or their values) that were
unsupported as DPA suggested - a direct query could be made to
find out the supported attributes.


RKD> That's fine, I wasn't suggesting returning a list of attributes
RKD> or values ... just wanted to indicate the reason the job was
RKD> rejected.


> In response to a Query, an IPP client shall not fail for any attributes or
> values for those attributes which are returned.


What does "fail" mean? Show an error that a bad response was
received?  Kill the currently running process?


Does "not fail" mean handle it as any other non error case?


RKD> What I meant by fail was to literally fail ... i.e.
RKD> do something unexpected, abend, display incorrect
RKD> info to the end-user, etc.



More information about the Ipp mailing list