[MFD] PWG Semantic Model: Capture of work that needs to be done. [Updated]

[MFD] PWG Semantic Model: Capture of work that needs to be done. [Updated]

[MFD] PWG Semantic Model: Capture of work that needs to be done. [Updated]

Paul Tykodi ptykodi at tykodi.com
Fri Mar 15 22:36:01 UTC 2013


Hi,

 

Update for item number 10.

 

SM work group would like input from AFP Consortium on CLOUDMAP 2.0 document
mapping of PJT to AFP Consortium MO:DCA-P and IPDS data streams. 

 

AFP Consortium is also interested in applicability of PWG Cloud print model
to their environment. They want to learn more about PWG cloud efforts as
well.

 

It is likely the AFP Consortium members will want to discuss both items at
the AFP Consortium meeting on Thursday April 11th, 2013.

 

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 <mailto:ptykodi at tykodi.com> 
WWW:  http://www.tykodi.com <http://www.tykodi.com/> 

 

From: mfd-bounces at pwg.org [mailto:mfd-bounces at pwg.org] On Behalf Of
Manchala, Daniel
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 4:06 PM
To: 'mfd at pwg.org'
Subject: [MFD] PWG Semantic Model: Capture of work that needs to be done.
[Updated]

 

Here is an update on the tasks (as of 3/15/2013).

 

On 2/25/2013, we captured a list of items that need to be done within the SM
WG. Items 8,9,10 were added on 2/27.

 

1.     Reduced (optimal) element set for Print Job Ticket - Glen Petrie
worked on this document and submitted it to WG. Update: (from Bill Wagner)
This has been addressed in the Cloud WG, although the way in which it may be
used was not agreed to.

2.     JSON binding that reflects the optimal element set for PJT - Pete
indicated that samples (examples in XML and JSON) exist in the present Print
Ticket standard - PJT.  These samples may not comprise the fully optimal set
noted in item 1 above.

3.     Simplified scan and resource job tickets and capabilities spec to
correspond to Google Job Ticket Specification. Update: (from Bill Wagner)
Michael Sweet's action item to send this to Google, as discussed in the
Cloud WG. 

4.     Scan Service 2.0 - The Scan Service Spec 1.0 was completed in the MFD
WG, before the Semantic Model was created.  Hence some work on co-relating
Scan Service 1.0 more to the common model is needed. Also, co-relating to
things discovered during the binding work on IPP Scan when IPP WG does the
IPP Scan work.  Note that since Google is pushing towards Cloud Scan either
(Cloud Scan Job Ticket + Capabilities) or an (Imaging Job Ticket +
Capabilities) should be part of the WG. Action Item: Daniel to check with
Nancy on version 1.0. - done. Update: The Scan Service 2.0 Spec can be
easily aligned with the MFD Common SM Spec. Of higher priority is the IPP
Scan Spec which does not use any model element names from the Scan Service
Spec. It is better to rewrite IPP Scan Spec to be aligned with the MFD Scan
Service Spec. (comment from Bill Wagner) - The Scan Service 1.0 was
completed not before the Semantic Model was created as noted above, but
before the Model and Common Semantics Specification was Approved.

5.     Resource Service 2.0 - The Resource Service Spec 1.0 was completed in
the MFD WG, before the Semantic Model was created.  Hence some work on
co-relating Resource Service 1.0 more to the common model is needed.
Security on the Resources in a Cloud and Enterprise Environment must be
considered.  Note that since Google is pushing towards Cloud Resource either
(Cloud Resource Job Ticket + Capabilities) should be part of the WG. -
Action Item: Daniel to check with Nancy on version 1.0 - done. Update: The
Resource Service 2.0 Spec can be easily aligned with the MFD Common SM Spec.
(comment from Bill Wagner) - The Scan Service 1.0 was completed not before
the Semantic Model was created as noted above, but before the Model and
Common Semantics Specification was Approved.

6.     Print Service 2.0 - (Get a good clean draft of the Print Service Spec
2.0; then update the Common Semantic Model; then get both approved) - No one
yet had agreed to work on the Print Service 2.0 draft. Bill Wagner has
volunteered to update the Common Semantic Model.

7.     Fax In Service - Ira McDonald to work on the draft. It is still
outstanding. - Update: Action Item: Daniel to touch base with Ira about when
he will present the draft.

8.     Transform Service 1.0 - Decide how to schedule moving Transform
Service 1.0 through the PWG SM Workgroup process to get the document
finished. The Transform Service 1.0 needs use case and design requirements
sections added. Typically a draft is developed and then everyone attending a
bi-weekly teleconference gives input while the sections in question are
reviewed page by page. Edits are collected and then a new draft is
published. Once the document seems relatively stable and no further work is
deemed appropriate by the SM Working Group a working group last call is
issued. - Update: Discuss the Transform Service 1.0 specification on Monday,
22 Apr. 2013 SM WG meeting (Paul will be at the AFP consortium on 8 Apr.
2013).

9.     Cloudmap 1.0 - Decide how to schedule moving Cloudmap 1.0 document
through the PWG SM workgroup review process so that it can begin its
approval process. Document is ready for a full review of the Microsoft
section in a bi-weekly teleconference. - Update: Discuss the Cloudmap 1.0
specification on Monday, 25 Mar. 2013. (comment from Bill Wagner) - the last
WD is dated Aug. 2012. We need an updated version posted if we need a
review. Action Item: Paul Tykodi.

10.  Joint meeting with AFP Consortium - Coordinate with AFP Consortium
about a date to review the initial white paper. Paul Tykodi to upload the
document to the White Paper folder in the MFD section of the FTP site. URL
will be posted after the document is uploaded. Paul has not received any
feedback from the AFP Consortium about reviewing the document since he sent
them the idea to discuss on March 11th.  - Update: The next AFP Consortium
meeting will be held Apr 8-11, 2013; Paul Tykodi will be presenting an
overview of PWG as well as SM on Apr. 11 (Boulder, CO), and how the SM helps
in cloud printing. Paul will be presenting an initial version of the mapping
document (IPDS and MO:DCA-P- PWG PJT). (comment from Bill Wagner) - I do not
see the referred white paper. I am a little confused by the objective. Harry
was chair of the PWG for many years and is fully familiar with the PWG. He
might need some update on where the semantic model has gone, and we may need
some help with the AFP protocols. But this does not seem to be a critical
path item for the SM group.

 

 

 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by  <http://www.mailscanner.info/> MailScanner, and is 
believed to be clean. 


-- 
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/mfd/attachments/20130315/0635d354/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the mfd mailing list