[IPP] [PWG5100.6] Issue #30: "overrides-supported": 'document-numbers' should be conditionally required depending on "multiple-document-jobs-supported" = 'true'

[IPP] [PWG5100.6] Issue #30: "overrides-supported": 'document-numbers' should be conditionally required depending on "multiple-document-jobs-supported" = 'true'

[IPP] [PWG5100.6] Issue #30: "overrides-supported": 'document-numbers' should be conditionally required depending on "multiple-document-jobs-supported" = 'true'

Kennedy, Smith (Wireless Architect) smith.kennedy at hp.com
Fri May 6 22:56:21 UTC 2016

Hi Pete,

Thanks for providing the background on this.  But it still seems a bit odd to me to require support for an attribute when the feature itself isn't supported.  As you say, if "document-numbers" is omitted, that is semantically equivalent to "all my documents" and on these products that is equivalent to "my first document" since it only supports one document per job.

Is your concern that there could be clients out there that would have their jobs rejected because they expect the printer to always support "document-numbers" and they don't?  There are certainly a lot of printers out there that do not support it.


    Smith Kennedy
    Wireless Architect - Client Software - IPG-PPS
    Standards - IEEE ISTO PWG / Bluetooth SIG / Wi-Fi Alliance / NFC Forum / USB IF
    PWG Chair
    HP Inc.

> On 2016-05-05, at 9:11 AM, Zehler, Peter <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com> wrote:
> All,
> If I remember correctly, the printer must accept the “document-numbers” in a client request even if the printer only supports single document jobs.  For a single document job, and a printer that supports either single or multiple document jobs,  the following attribute values in request containing an "overrides" attribute would all be equivalent:
> "document-numbers": '1: 2147483647', (i.e., all my documents)
> "document-numbers": '1: 1', (i.e., my first document)
> "document-numbers" omitted (i.e. all my documents)
> The client may specify a subset of documents to which the override is applied.  The implication of not specifying is that the overrides applies to all.    The printer must accept and understand all of these.  A client specifying a document number that does not exist is ignored since the override applies only to the pages/documents/document-copies specified for the override.
> I think it is simpler and cleaner to keep the primary specification of the override target (i.e., pages and document) mandatory for the printer to support in a request while the edge case (i.e., document-copies) remains optional.
> Peter Zehler
> Xerox Corp.
> Global Development Group
> 800 Phillips Rd, 111-04A
> Webster NY, 14580-9701
> Email: Peter.Zehler at Xerox.com
> Office: +1 (585) 265-8755
> Fax: +1 (585) 422-0238
> Mobile: +1 (585) 329-9508
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ipp [mailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org] On Behalf Of smith.kennedy at hp.com
> Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 4:27 PM
> To: ipp at pwg.org
> Subject: [IPP] [PWG5100.6] Issue #30: "overrides-supported": 'document-numbers' should be conditionally required depending on "multiple-document-jobs-supported" = 'true'
> [Issue Unconfirmed]
> PWG 5100.6-2004 section 4.1.7 says:
>   This attribute MUST contain the keywords “pages” and “document-numbers” because
>   a Printer MUST support these attributes.
> But the 'document-numbers' attribute should not be required unconditionally; it should be conditionally required depending on whether the Printer reports "multiple-document-jobs-supported" = 'true'.  If it doesn't support "multiple-document-jobs-supported" or reports "multiple-document-jobs-supported" = 'false' then 'document-numbers' should not be required.
> Link: http://www.pwg.org/issues/30
> _______________________________________________
> ipp mailing list
> ipp at pwg.org
> https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4956 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20160506/e6ce6488/attachment.p7s>

More information about the ipp mailing list