SM> Terminology comment: "Job Attributes" and "Document Attributes"

SM> Terminology comment: "Job Attributes" and "Document Attributes"

SM> Terminology comment: "Job Attributes" and "Document Attributes"

Hastings, Tom N hastings at cp10.es.xerox.com
Mon Aug 26 20:50:28 EDT 2002


Peter,

I don't have any problem with the PWG Semantic Model improving on the
terminology from IPP, such as the term "Processing Attributes" instead of
"Job Template Attributes".  I also think that the Processing Attributes are
a combination of the IPP Job Template attributes and the Job Creation
operation attributes, and the concept of operation attributes has
disappeared, right?

However, where the IPP terminology is OK, I suggest we stick with it.

For example, the term "Job Attributes" (section 2.2.1, Figure 5 and Section
4.2 Table 4) is equivalent to the IPP Job Description Attributes.  I suggest
that we stick with the term "Job Description Attributes" in the PWG Semantic
Model, i.e., attributes that the Printer produces the values for.  Another
reason is that the term Job Attributes should mean all of the attributes of
the Job object, not a subset.  The Processing Attributes are really Job
Attributes too, since the client supplies them, but the Printer copies them
to the Job object.

So I suggest that a Job object contains Job Attributes which consist of
Processing Attributes supplied by the client and Job Description attribute
supplied by the Printer.

Same for the term "Document Attributes" (section 2.3.1, Figure 7, section
4.3, Table 5).  The term should be "Document Description Attributes".  So a
Document object contains Document Attributes which consist of Processing
Attributes supplied by the client and Document Description attribute
supplied by the Printer.

Tom

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Zehler, Peter [mailto:PZehler at crt.xerox.com]
Sent: Saturday, August 24, 2002 18:05
To: 'sm at pwg.org'
Subject: SM> Semantic documernts


All,

Sorry if this as a repeat for you.  I apparently was not subscribed to the
sm mailing list for some unknown reason.  Therefore I have missed any
traffic.  

In preparation for the meeting in Santa Fe  a new version of the Semantic
Model document was posted on the PWG site. The URL is
"<ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/Semantic_model/PWG-Semantic-Model-07-020816.pdf>
". We will use this document with line numbers as the basis for our
conversation at the PWG meeting.
I have updated the XML schema files based on input and the new semantic
document.  There is now a "master list" of all the semantic elements(and
types) defined by the PWG Semantic model (See i).  These semantic elements
and groups are referenced from the other files.  There is a single file that
defines the grouping of processing attributes into the 4 groups finishing,
rendering, imposition and job-level (See ii).  The document, job and printer
are described in the remaining files.

VI. Review Attribute Structure Object Schemas
	i.    ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/Semantic_model/PwgAttr.xsd
	ii.
ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/Semantic_model/ProcessingAttributes.xsd
 	iii.  ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/Semantic_model/Document.xsd
	iv.
ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/Semantic_model/DocumentAttributes.xsd
	v.    ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/Semantic_model/Job.xsd
	vi.   ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/Semantic_model/JobAttributes.xsd
	vii.  ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/Semantic_model/Printer.xsd
	viii. ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/Semantic_model/PrinterAttributes.xsd

Pete



More information about the Sm mailing list