Pete,
>From today's Cloud conference call we decided on "preferred-attributes" (collection) as the IPP attribute name and "PreferredElements" (group) for the XML schema. The IPP attribute will be returned in the unsupported attributes group.
On Jan 15, 2012, at 9:21 AM, Zehler, Peter wrote:
> Why do we have a bunch of xxx-preferred attributes? It complicates the model with a bunch of attributes and is not general purpose enough to address all the possible conflicting attributes and values.
>> Is there any reason we cannot provide this functionality in a manner similar to “unsupported-attributes”. The “unsupported-attributes” is handled in IPP as an out of band group in an IPP response. We could extend the encoding of out of band attributes to include a new group for “xxx-preferred” . That way any substituted or conflicting attributes and values could be returned for a Validate operation.
> I would prefer to handle “xxx-preferred” using the collection syntax. I think it is easier and requires fewer changes to the IPP encoding. Defining “attributes-preferred” as a collection of attributes and permitting any template attributes to be included would be a simple generalization. It would also allow a client to pick those attribute/values out to correct their request and not rely on printer substitution.
>> Peter Zehler
>> Xerox Research Center Webster
> Email: Peter.Zehler at Xerox.com> Voice: (585) 265-8755
> FAX: (585) 265-7441
> US Mail: Peter Zehler
> Xerox Corp.
> 800 Phillips Rd.
> M/S 128-25E
> Webster NY, 14580-9701
>>> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
> ipp mailing list
>ipp at pwg.org>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp
________________________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20120116/647ddf8b/attachment-0001.html>