On Oct 16, 2013, at 4:49 PM, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>> Agreed - Service(s) --> Printer(s) in IPP.
>> But this locks us in forever to only output services (like FaxOut), right?
I don't think so - it just means that we start calling scanners and other imaging services "Printers" since the protocol started life to support printing.
Alternately we go back and define aliases for the original print-centric operation codes to use Service instead of Printer, but then we also would want to rename printer-xxx attributes to service-xxx which would impact the on-the-wire encoding (whereas adding a name that has the same operation code doesn't...)
> The IPP URI scheme (and IPPS URI scheme) allow URIs to reference any
> object (not just IPP Printer), e.g., Subscription.
> So I think we ought to at least briefly discuss this (Service-->Printer)
> closing the future off at the F2F, before finalizing.
Absolutely, and something we should be discuss during our SCS time slot.
> I'm thinking about modelling IPP attributes for ConfiguredPrinters and
> ConfiguredResources (in the System object) and some of the other
> complex attributes (presumably they'll become collections?).
That would be my preference, yes.
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...