[IPP] [MFD] Don't redefine Hardcopy Document

[IPP] [MFD] Don't redefine Hardcopy Document

[IPP] [MFD] Don't redefine Hardcopy Document

Michael Sweet msweet at msweet.org
Wed Aug 7 15:50:04 UTC 2013


Ira,

IIRC, all of the SM operations use <service> in their names, currently Add<service>HardcopyDocument, Send<service>Document, and Send<service>Uri.

Using Add<service>ScanDocument might get confusing.  Add<service>DocumentFromScanner? Or Send<service>DocumentFromScanner to retain consistency with the other Send operations?


On 2013-08-07, at 11:32 AM, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Paul,
> 
> No - I object to AddHardcopyDocument.  The only NEW kind of document
> (other than w/ data by value or w/ data by reference) is a scanned document.
> No other service would ever be infixed in your proposal.
> 
> I much prefer AddScanDocument as parallel to [Add/Send]Document.
> 
> Cheers,
> - Ira
> 
> 
> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
> Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
> Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
> Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG IPP WG
> Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
> Chair - TCG Embedded Systems Hardcopy SG
> IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
> Blue Roof Music/High North Inc
> http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic
> http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
> mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com
> Winter  579 Park Place  Saline, MI  48176  734-944-0094
> Summer  PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Paul Tykodi <ptykodi at tykodi.com> wrote:
> Hi Ira,
> 
>  
> 
> Following your logic, should we consider maintaining AddHardcopyDocument as the top level in the SM tree and then expand the model with Add<RelevantPWGDefinedService>Document at the next level in the model for each service that can support hardcopy document input?
> 
>  
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
>  
> 
> /Paul
> 
> --
> 
> Paul Tykodi
> Principal Consultant
> TCS - Tykodi Consulting Services LLC
> 
> Tel/Fax: 603-343-1820
> Mobile:  603-866-0712
> E-mail:  ptykodi at tykodi.com
> WWW:  http://www.tykodi.com
> 
> From: mfd-bounces at pwg.org [mailto:mfd-bounces at pwg.org] On Behalf Of Ira McDonald
> Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 11:16 AM
> To: Zehler, Peter; Ira McDonald
> Cc: IPP at pwg.org; mfd at pwg.org; Michael Sweet
> Subject: Re: [MFD] [IPP] Don't redefine Hardcopy Document
> 
>  
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Which I think implies that I'd like to rename AddHardcopyDocument to
> 
> AddScanDocument.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> - Ira
> 
> 
> 
> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
> Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
> Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
> Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG IPP WG
> Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
> Chair - TCG Embedded Systems Hardcopy SG
> IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
> Blue Roof Music/High North Inc
> http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic
> http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
> mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com
> Winter  579 Park Place  Saline, MI  48176  734-944-0094
> Summer  PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434
> 
>  
> 
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> At the risk of adding confusion...
> 
> We speak of submitting Jobs with document data by reference (URI)
> or by value (attached). 
> 
> 
> Why not just add "by scan (local scanner)".
> 
> What I don't like about the term "Hardcopy Document Object" is that 
> the word Scan or Scanner isn't there, but this is always the source.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> - Ira
> 
> PS - I dislike putting titlecase prefixes on Document Object or Job
> 
> Object - it muddies readability.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
> Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
> Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
> Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG IPP WG
> Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
> Chair - TCG Embedded Systems Hardcopy SG
> IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
> Blue Roof Music/High North Inc
> http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic
> http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
> mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com
> Winter  579 Park Place  Saline, MI  48176  734-944-0094
> Summer  PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434
> 
>  
> 
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Zehler, Peter <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com> wrote:
> 
> Mike,
> 
> Well, I guess I’ll be quiet now except to say it would be a good time to describe the attributes and constraints on all three types of Documents. J
> 
> Pete
> 
>  
> 
> 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
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: Michael Sweet [mailto:msweet at msweet.org] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2013 10:14 PM
> 
> 
> To: Zehler, Peter
> Cc: IPP at pwg.org; mfd at pwg.org
> Subject: Re: [IPP] Don't redefine Hardcopy Document
> 
>  
> 
> Pete,
> 
>  
> 
> I guess we are in violent agreement.  One comment below.
> 
>  
> 
> On 2013-08-06, at 12:54 PM, "Zehler, Peter" <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com> wrote:
> 
> ..
> 
> This is the difference between a Hardcopy Document and a Hardcopy Document /Object/. We need to define the latter and not the former.
> 
> <PZ>I see no subclasses of Documents in the PWG Semantic Model or IPP.  Whether a document is added to a Job by value, by reference, or by reference to the output of the scanner subunit, it is still just a Document object. 
> 
>  
> 
> I am not suggesting a subclass of document.
> 
>  
> 
> We already categorize documents as "referenced" and "with attached document data". For hardcopy documents we would have a Document Object containing description attributes/elements that identify the source and properties of the hardcopy document.
> 
>  
> 
> I chose to call it a "Hardcopy Document Object" as opposed to a "Document Object with Associated Hardcopy Document Input Elements".  How the digital representation is stored and when exactly the document is scanned are, IMHO, implementation specific.
> 
>  
> 
> _____________
> Michael Sweet
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ipp mailing list
> ipp at pwg.org
> https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 

_____________
Michael Sweet

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20130807/3bcb0eb1/attachment.html>


More information about the ipp mailing list