[MFD] [IPP] Don't redefine Hardcopy Document

[MFD] [IPP] Don't redefine Hardcopy Document

[MFD] [IPP] Don't redefine Hardcopy Document

Ira McDonald blueroofmusic at gmail.com
Wed Aug 7 15:50:57 UTC 2013


Hi,

Never mind - I've gone into the weeds.

I didn't mean to infix the <service> at all.  I meant to infix the
property of Hardcopy (or Scanned).

I've run afoul of naming conventions in SM operations...

Cheers,
- Ira


Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG IPP WG
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - TCG Embedded Systems Hardcopy SG
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
Winter  579 Park Place  Saline, MI  48176  734-944-0094
Summer  PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434



On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Zehler, Peter <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com>wrote:

>  I thought that was the original intention.  We just needed to insure the
> operation parameters and the associated document attributes are consistent
> across all the services.****
>
> ** **
>
> See PWG 5108.01-2011****
>
> Table 77 MFD Common Operations and Antecedents****
>
> Table 78 Basic MFD Interface Requests and Responses****
>
> section 7.3.1.1 Add<service>HardcopyDocument****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> Peter Zehler
>
> Xerox Research Center Webster
> Email: Peter.Zehler at Xerox.com
> Voice: (585) 265-8755
> FAX: (585) 265-7441
> US Mail: Peter Zehler
> Xerox Corp.
> 800 Phillips Rd.
> M/S 128-25E
> Webster NY, 14580-9701 ****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Paul Tykodi [mailto:ptykodi at tykodi.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 07, 2013 11:29 AM
> *To:* 'Ira McDonald'
> *Cc:* IPP at pwg.org; mfd at pwg.org; 'Michael Sweet'; Zehler, Peter
> *Subject:* RE: [MFD] [IPP] Don't redefine Hardcopy Document****
>
> ** **
>
> Hi Ira,****
>
> ** **
>
> Following your logic, should we consider maintaining AddHardcopyDocument
> as the top level in the SM tree and then expand the model with
> Add<RelevantPWGDefinedService>Document at the next level in the model for
> each service that can support hardcopy document input?****
>
> ** **
>
> 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
> WWW:  http://www.tykodi.com****
>
> *From:* mfd-bounces at pwg.org [mailto:mfd-bounces at pwg.org<mfd-bounces at pwg.org>]
> *On Behalf Of *Ira McDonald
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 07, 2013 11:16 AM
> *To:* Zehler, Peter; Ira McDonald
> *Cc:* IPP at pwg.org; mfd at pwg.org; Michael Sweet
> *Subject:* Re: [MFD] [IPP] Don't redefine Hardcopy Document****
>
> ** **
>
> Hi,****
>
> Which I think implies that I'd like to rename AddHardcopyDocument to****
>
> AddScanDocument.****
>
> Cheers,****
>
> - Ira****
>
>
> ****
>
> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
> Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
> Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
> Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG IPP WG
> Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
> Chair - TCG Embedded Systems Hardcopy SG
> 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
> Winter  579 Park Place  Saline, MI  48176  734-944-0094
> Summer  PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434****
>
> ** **
>
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com>
> wrote:****
>
> Hi,****
>
> At the risk of adding confusion...
>
> We speak of submitting Jobs with document data by reference (URI)
> or by value (attached).  ****
>
>
> Why not just add "by scan (local scanner)".****
>
> What I don't like about the term "Hardcopy Document Object" is that
> the word Scan or Scanner isn't there, but this is always the source.****
>
> Cheers,****
>
> - Ira****
>
> PS - I dislike putting titlecase prefixes on Document Object or Job****
>
> Object - it muddies readability.****
>
>
> ****
>
> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
> Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
> Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
> Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG IPP WG
> Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
> Chair - TCG Embedded Systems Hardcopy SG
> 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
> Winter  579 Park Place  Saline, MI  48176  734-944-0094
> Summer  PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434****
>
> ** **
>
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Zehler, Peter <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com>
> wrote:****
>
>   Mike,****
>
> Well, I guess I’ll be quiet now except to say it would be a good time to
> describe the attributes and constraints on all three types of Documents. J
> ****
>
> Pete****
>
>  ****
>
> Peter Zehler
>
> Xerox Research Center Webster
> Email: Peter.Zehler at Xerox.com
> Voice: (585) 265-8755
> FAX: (585) 265-7441
> US Mail: Peter Zehler
> Xerox Corp.
> 800 Phillips Rd.
> M/S 128-25E
> Webster NY, 14580-9701 ****
>
>  ****
>
>  ****
>
> *From:* Michael Sweet [mailto:msweet at msweet.org]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 06, 2013 10:14 PM****
>
>
> *To:* Zehler, Peter
> *Cc:* IPP at pwg.org; mfd at pwg.org
> *Subject:* Re: [IPP] Don't redefine Hardcopy Document****
>
>  ****
>
> Pete,****
>
>  ****
>
> I guess we are in violent agreement.  One comment below.****
>
>  ****
>
> On 2013-08-06, at 12:54 PM, "Zehler, Peter" <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com>
> wrote:****
>
>  ..****
>
> This is the difference between a Hardcopy Document and a Hardcopy Document
> /Object/. We need to define the latter and not the former.****
>
> <PZ>I see no subclasses of Documents in the PWG Semantic Model or IPP.
> Whether a document is added to a Job by value, by reference, or by
> reference to the output of the scanner subunit, it is still just a Document
> object. ****
>
>   ****
>
> I am not suggesting a subclass of document.****
>
>  ****
>
> We already categorize documents as "referenced" and "with attached
> document data". For hardcopy documents we would have a Document Object
> containing description attributes/elements that identify the source and
> properties of the hardcopy document.****
>
>  ****
>
> I chose to call it a "Hardcopy Document Object" as opposed to a "Document
> Object with Associated Hardcopy Document Input Elements".  How the digital
> representation is stored and when exactly the document is scanned are,
> IMHO, implementation specific.****
>
>  ****
>
> _____________
> Michael Sweet****
>
>  ****
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/mfd/attachments/20130807/0b62d016/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the mfd mailing list