IPP> MOD - NLO 2 of 4: Clarification that Natural Language Override M AY be used redundantly

IPP> MOD - NLO 2 of 4: Clarification that Natural Language Override M AY be used redundantly

IPP> MOD - NLO 2 of 4: Clarification that Natural Language Override M AY be used redundantly

Hastings, Tom N hastings at cp10.es.xerox.com
Wed Oct 21 11:51:28 EDT 1998


The purpose of this clarification is to explicitly allow use of the Natural
Language Override in situations where implementers thought it couldn't be
used.  Therefore, this clarification should not force any existing
conforming implementations to change.

There seems to be general agreement to clarify the specification so that a
request or response MAY contain a Natural Language Override for an attribute
value, even when the natural language is the same as the natural language
specified for the request or response in the "attributes-natural-language"
Operation attribute.  So the sender of a request or a response MAY include
the 'textWithlanguage' or 'nameWithLanguage' data type even when it
specifies a natural language that is the same as that specified for that
request or response in the "attributes-natural-language" Operation
attribute.  Therefore, an implementation could always use the
'xxxxWithLanguage' forms with all attributes.

================================================
= Please reply to this e-mail message if there is any disagreement 
= on this clarification.  If no disagreements are returned by Monday, 
= November 2, it will be considered an agreed clarification.
================================================

Note: that the votes on e-mail messages (3 of 4) and (4 of 4) may remove the
need for this (2 of 4) clarification.  But please comment on these
clarifications assuming that the changes specified in the votes do NOT
happen.


The current text in Section 3.1.4.1 Request Operation Attributes, 5th
paragraph of "attributes-natural-language says:

		For any 'text' or 'name' attribute in the request that is in
a different natural language than the value supplied in the
"attributes-natural-language", the client MUST use the Natural Language
Override mechanism (see sections 4.1.1.2 and 4.1.2.2) for each such
attribute value supplied.

The clarification is to add the following sentence to the end of the
paragraph:

		The client MAY use the Natural Language Override mechanism
even when the value is in the same natural language.

The 7th paragraph says:

		Whenever any client queries the Job object's "job-name"
attribute, the IPP object returns the attribute as stored and uses the
Natural Language Override mechanism to specify the natural language, if it
is different from that reported in the "attributes-natural-language"
operation attribute of the response.  

The clarification is to add the following sentence:

		The IPP object MAY use the Natural Language Override
mechanism even when the value is in the same natural language.

The last paragraph of 3.1.4.2 contains the sentence:

		For any 'text' or 'name' attribute or status message in the
response that is in a different natural language than the value returned in
the "attributes-natural-language" operation attribute, the IPP object MUST
use the Natural Language Override mechanism (see sections 4.1.1.2 and
4.1.2.2) on each attribute value returned.

The clarification is to add the same following sentence:

		The IPP object MAY use the Natural Language Override
mechanism even when the value is in the same natural language.



Tom Hastings
(310) 333-6413








More information about the Ipp mailing list