JMP> Re: IPP> MOD JobState suggestion

JMP> Re: IPP> MOD JobState suggestion

JMP> Re: IPP> MOD JobState suggestion

Harry Lewis harryl at us.ibm.com
Thu Jun 5 12:57:33 EDT 1997


I don't want to begin making the diagram too complex.


>>              +--------->----------+------>------+--> canceled(7)
>>              |                    |             |
>>     +---> pending(3) -------> processing(5) -------> completed(9)
>>     |        ^                    ^  \          |
>> --->+        |                    |   +------------> aborted(8)
>>     |        v                    v  /          |
>>     +---> held(4)             stopped(6)        |
                |                    |             |
                +--------->----------+------>------+


I only want to assure that the state diagram does not give the impression that,
to cancel or abort a job, the flow has to be back through processing.


>                                                +--> canceled(7)
>                                               /
>    +---> pending(3) ----> processing(5) -----+----> aborted(8)
>    |        ^                    ^            \
>--->+        |                    |             +--> completed(9)
>    |        v                    |
>    +---> held(4)    processing-stopped(6)




What was wrong with my proposal?


>                                                +--> canceled(7)
>                                               /
>    +---> pending(3) ----> processing(5) ---+-+----> aborted(8)
>    |        ^                    ^         |  \
>--->+        |                    |         |   +--> completed(9)
>    |        v                    v         |
>    +---> held(4)    processing-stopped(6)  |
>             |                    |         |
>             +--------------------+---------+
>


>>>  Harry  <<<



More information about the Ipp mailing list