Bill,
On Jul 3, 2013, at 5:11 PM, William A Wagner <wamwagner at comcast.net> wrote:
> Interesting arguments on both sides… although I am not quite sure about the “consensus that we need to define a hardcopy document object and its supporting elements and semantics.” except perhaps in the context of the “AddHardcopyDocument” operation.
There is AddHardcopyDocument, and there are the accounting issues that Pete raised and we have all acknowledged that point to a need to know where a document came from (attached data, URI, scanner). That discussion will definitely yield some common semantics and elements for working with hardcopy documents, and may yield some additional elements/definition of the document object.
Random thought: document/job source is also used for FaxIn and EmailIn, so perhaps the notion of where a job and/or document comes from should formally be part of the general model and definition of jobs and documents for all services. This would also tie into some of the existing IDS work... If I get a chance I'll try to put together a more formal proposal...
_________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
--
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/20130704/4d565069/attachment-0002.html>