PWG-ANNOUNCE> Charter for XHTML-Print Working Group

PWG-ANNOUNCE> Charter for XHTML-Print Working Group

PWG-ANNOUNCE> Charter for XHTML-Print Working Group

don at lexmark.com don at lexmark.com
Wed Mar 7 10:54:20 EST 2001



All:

First of all, this thread needs to move to the pwg at pwg.org mailing list.  Please
do not do a REPLY TO ALL without changing to the pwg list.

As I have stated often and in several meetings of groups interested in
XHTML-Print, I too would like to see XHTML-Print progress to the W3C at some
point.  However, it really can't go there first because of the schedule demands
being placed on XHTML-Print.  It is clear that few people on this list really
understand the W3C process.  As Lexmark's representative to the W3C Advisory
Council, I am very familar with that process so let me explain.

If the XHTML-Print document were to be a Submission to the W3C, it would have
roughly equal (but in reality less) standing than a personal ID to the IETF.
The problem is that the W3C is NOT required to do anything with it except
acknowledge the submission.  If we could "whip up" enough support within the W3C
to get some interest in it and if a majority of the 400 plus members of the W3C
(perhaps 10 of which have an interest in printing)concur we might get a project
started.  That process could then run for 1 or 2 years before a W3C
Recommendation would appear.  Until there is an approved project there would be
no home the documents, no home for the DTDs and no MIME type registered.  If we
do it first in the PWG and then work with the W3C on a submission and a future
project, all this would be taken care of until the W3C work is complete.  This
would be a "Draft Standard" under the PWG process followed by a "Recommendation"
under the W3C process.

The PWG has an excellent history of working with other standards bodies and I
expect it could do the same with the W3C.  We have worked with the IEEE SA to
create things like 1284-2000 and P1394.3.  We have worked with the IETF on IPP
and MIBs.  I fully expect that would could get the XHTML-Print standard stable
and with some implementation experience and then take it to the W3C and run it
through their process.  In the mean time, the printing community would have an
XTHML-Print standard to hand their hat.

**********************************************
* Don Wright                 don at lexmark.com *
* Chair, Printer Working Group               *
* Chair, IEEE MSC                            *
*                                            *
* Director, Strategic & Technical Alliances  *
* Lexmark International                      *
* 740 New Circle Rd                          *
* Lexington, Ky 40550                        *
* 859-232-4808 (phone) 859-232-6740 (fax)    *
**********************************************







"ALBRIGHT,SHIVAUN (HP-Roseville,ex1)"
<shivaun_albright%hp.com at interlock.lexmark.com> on 03/06/2001 05:35:18 PM

To:   "'Manros, Carl-Uno B'" <cmanros%cp10.es.xerox.com at interlock.lexmark.com>,
      "ALBRIGHT,SHIVAUN (HP-Roseville,ex1)"
      <shivaun_albright%hp.com at interlock.lexmark.com>,
      "'ElliottBradshaw at oaktech.com'"
      <ElliottBradshaw%oaktech.com at interlock.lexmark.com>,
      "Don_Wright/Lex/Lexmark.LEXMARK"@sweeper.lex.lexmark.com
cc:   pwg-announce%pwg.org at interlock.lexmark.com (bcc: Don Wright/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject:  RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Charter for XHTML-Print Working Group



I would like to propose that the owners of the document get together to
discuss this issue outlining the pros and cons of the different options and
return to their respective groups with a recommendation.

It's HP's current thinking that the W3C would be a better venue for this
document.  The W3C would seem the logical place since most, if not all, of
the technology in X-HTML Print has been developed in the W3C group (e.g.,
XHTML 1.0, XML, CSS).  A strong motive in choosing the W3C approach would be
to promote better integration of printing with web-based technologies.  One
suggested path might be to submit X-HTML Print version 1.0 as a "note" to
the W3C.  This provides a long-term, vendor-neutral web site for the
document.  Subsequent to this, we could start a print-focused working group
to address some of the issues we find with using XHTML for printing and
ensure this information is fed to the other W3C groups (e.g., CSS).

Regards,

Shivaun

_______________________________________________________________________
Shivaun Albright
Engineer Scientist
Internet Imaging and Printing Systems (iIPS)
Hewlett Packard
Roseville, CA
(916) 785-7191
_______________________________________________________________________


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Manros, Carl-Uno B [mailto:cmanros at cp10.es.xerox.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 4:33 PM
> To: 'ALBRIGHT,SHIVAUN (HP-Roseville,ex1)';
> 'ElliottBradshaw at oaktech.com'; don at lexmark.com
> Cc: pwg-announce at pwg.org
> Subject: RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Charter for XHTML-Print Working Group
>
>
> Shivaun,
>
> I think we all want the spec to get out quickly.
>
> What is still unclear to me is what alternative you prefer to have it
> published by the PWG.
>
> Is it to publish the XHTML spec as one of the UPnP documents?
>
> If so, it not yet clear to me how open the UPnP specs are
> going to be once
> they are published, e.g. can anybody get hold of them and can they be
> referenced by other standards groups, and who will take on
> any maintenance
> of the spec once it is finished?
>
> Carl-Uno
>
> Carl-Uno Manros
> Manager, Print Services
> Xerox Architecture Center - Xerox Corporation
> 701 S. Aviation Blvd., El Segundo, CA, M/S: ESAE-231
> Phone +1-310-333 8273, Fax +1-310-333 5514
> Email: manros at cp10.es.xerox.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ALBRIGHT,SHIVAUN (HP-Roseville,ex1)
> [mailto:shivaun_albright at hp.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 5:11 PM
> To: 'ElliottBradshaw at oaktech.com'; don at lexmark.com
> Cc: pwg-announce at pwg.org
> Subject: RE: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Charter for XHTML-Print Working Group
>
>
> As the Chairperson of the UPNP Imaging committee I am against
> starting a
> separate working group to develop X-HTML Print.  We are very close to
> locking down the BasicPrint Service which requires X-HTML
> Print and I had
> envisioned locking down the X-HTML Print document in
> parallel.   It seems
> that we are winding down the X-HTML Print discussions and are close to
> agreement on a version of X-HTML Print that vendors could
> implement.  In
> fact, the current UPNP Print Committee schedule has the X-HTML Print
> document listed as "done" by 3/31/01 with a subsequent vote
> to agree on the
> "final" version.   I have concerns that a separate working
> committee to
> develop X-HTML Print could prolong the entire process for a UPNP Print
> standard.
>
> Regards,
>
> Shivaun Albright
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> _________
> Shivaun Albright
> Engineer Scientist
> Internet Imaging and Printing Systems (iIPS)
> Hewlett Packard
> Roseville, CA
> (916) 785-7191
> ______________________________________________________________
> _________
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ElliottBradshaw at oaktech.com
> [mailto:ElliottBradshaw at oaktech.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 2:09 PM
> > To: don at lexmark.com
> > Cc: pwg-announce at pwg.org
> > Subject: Re: PWG-ANNOUNCE> Charter for XHTML-Print Working Group
> >
> >
> >
> > Don,
> >
> > We won't be at the plenary (although Norbert will be in Tampa
> > for the UPDF
> > meeting) so here is our two cents.
> >
> > PWG seems like the right home for XHTML-Print.  We like the
> > work you've
> > done and hope it becomes final soon.   I wonder what impact
> > this will have
> > on the timing within the UPnP group.  Since the plan there
> has been to
> > finalize this soon, would that vote go ahead?  What happens
> if the PWG
> > process makes changes afterwards?  Perhaps PWG should vote on
> > adopting the
> > UPnP result lock stock and barrel, or else UPnP should just
> > turn it over
> > right away.
> >
> > Also, I assume a goal is to do this in a way that the
> > Bluetooth folks can
> > adopt it as well...true?
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------
> > Elliott Bradshaw
> > Director, Software Engineering
> > Oak Technology Imaging Group
> > 781 638-7534
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                     don at lexmark.com
> >
> >                     Sent by:                To:
> > pwg-announce at pwg.org
> >                     owner-pwg-announ        cc:
> > melinda_grant at hp.com,
> >                     ce at pwg.org
> > fujisawa.jun at canon.co.jp,
> >
> > peter.zehler at usa.xerox.com
> >                                             Subject:
> > PWG-ANNOUNCE> Charter for
> >                     02/27/01 04:23          XHTML-Print
> > Working Group
> >                     PM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > A working group to develop the XHTML-Print "datastream" is
> > being proposed
> > for
> > the PWG.  I have included a pointer to a proposed charter
> > which will be
> > discussed at the PWG Plenary in Tampa.
> >
> > ftp://ftp.pwg.org.pub/pwg/xhtml-print/charter/XHTML-Print-Char
> ter-01.doc
>
> Comments should be sent to me or brought up at the Plenary in
> Tampa.  A
> mailing
> list for this project has not yet been set up yet.
>
> **********************************************
> * Don Wright                 don at lexmark.com *
> * Chair, Printer Working Group               *
> * Chair, IEEE MSC                            *
> *                                            *
> * Director, Strategic & Technical Alliances  *
> * Lexmark International                      *
> * 740 New Circle Rd                          *
> * Lexington, Ky 40550                        *
> * 859-232-4808 (phone) 859-232-6740 (fax)    *
> **********************************************
>
>
>
>







More information about the Pwg-announce mailing list