Hi Ira,
Do you think the document object might be a good topic to cover in the IPP book we have been discussing?
Thanks.
Best Regards,
/Paul
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 12, 2018, at 2:24 PM, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I agree with Mike. Document object has the complexity of the Job object plus bells and whistles.
> Subscription object covering multiple targets (System, Printer, Job, Document) is complex.
>> Even IPP/2.0 (w/ 2.1 and 2.2) is just brief lists of required attributes and operations for three levels
> of IPP Printer capabilities (and no longer even close to all inclusive).
>> RFCs 8010/8011 are meant to be strictly cleanups of RFCs 2910/2911 - the universe of IPP (over
> 30 IETF and PWG specs) is too broad to cover in one spec, without major omissions.
>> Cheers,
> - Ira
>>> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
> Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
> Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
> Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
> Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
> 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> Jan-April: 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094
> May-Dec: PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434
>>>> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Michael Sweet <msweet at apple.com> wrote:
>> Smith,
>>>> > On Mar 12, 2018, at 1:16 PM, Kennedy, Smith (Wireless & Standards Architec) <smith.kennedy at hp.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> On Mar 9, 2018, at 2:54 PM, Michael Sweet <msweet at apple.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Smith,
>> >>
>> >> PWG 5100.5 is an extension to IPP/1.1 that defines the Document object, the document-attributes-tag (group) value, and the amended semantics for the Send-Document and Send-URI operations. None of that was part of the core IPP/1.1 (which is what RFC 8011 defines) and we've historically been conservative about requiring support for the Document object extension - right now only IPP/2.2 and IPP INFRA require it and most implementations only support a single document per job anyways...
>> >
>> > I understand that we cannot add additional normative requirements. I was just thinking that, if the "document group" were mentioned even in passing as an optional group in 8011, with a reference to PWG 5100.5, that would help with the "cross referencing" thing.
>>>> We also have the Subscription object and its associated attribute group that can be included in Job Creation operations but which we don't say anything about (beyond a reference in the introduction)...
>>>> I think the last thing we want to do is One Spec to Rule Them All™. And honestly I don't think that mentioning other attribute groups without providing any details will be all that useful, especially for something as complicated as the Document object extension.
>>>> _________________________________________________________
>> Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer
>>>> _______________________________________________
>> ipp mailing list
>>ipp at pwg.org>>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp>> _______________________________________________
> ipp mailing list
>ipp at pwg.org>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20180312/152059aa/attachment.html>