[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 15:52:15 UTC 2013


Hi Mike,

Or "Add<service>ScannedDocument"?  "Hardcopy" is causing some
confusion, it seems.

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 11:50 AM, Michael Sweet <msweet at msweet.org> wrote:

> Ira,
>
> IIRC, all of the SM operations use <service> in their names, currently
> Add<service>HardcopyDocument, Send<service>Document, and Send<service>Uri.
>
> Using Add<service>ScanDocument might get confusing.
>  Add<service>DocumentFromScanner? Or Send<service>DocumentFromScanner to
> retain consistency with the other Send operations?
>
>
> On 2013-08-07, at 11:32 AM, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Paul,
>
> No - I object to AddHardcopyDocument.  The only NEW kind of document
> (other than w/ data by value or w/ data by reference) is a scanned
> document.
> No other service would ever be infixed in your proposal.
>
> I much prefer AddScanDocument as parallel to [Add/Send]Document.
>
> 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 11:29 AM, Paul Tykodi <ptykodi at tykodi.com> wrote:
>
>> 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] *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****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>
>
> _____________
> Michael Sweet
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/mfd/attachments/20130807/58c17b40/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the mfd mailing list