SM> Re: IPP> 2 more significant proposed increases in conformance requirements for the IPP Document object spec

SM> Re: IPP> 2 more significant proposed increases in conformance requirements for the IPP Document object spec

SM> Re: IPP> 2 more significant proposed increases in conformance requirements for the IPP Document object spec

Dennis Carney dcarney at us.ibm.com
Mon Apr 21 12:11:46 EDT 2003





This might be an awful idea, so feel free to shoot it down with vicious
force...

Based on the desire to have extensions that do not include OPTIONAL items,
might it make sense to break the current Document object spec into two:
- The "Base Document object" spec, which defines the basics of the Document
object and has no OPTIONAL items: everything is mandatory.  This would make
interop a breeze, and would hopefully also encourage adoption since the
spec would hopefully be relatively small.
- The "Extended Document object" spec, containing all the currently
OPTIONAL items.  This spec *could* also make all the extensions mandatory
(I would think that making absolutely *everything* mandatory would
discourage adoption, however).

The process of going through the current spec to determine which items are
"Base" and which are "Extended" might also result in determining which
items aren't "Document object" items at all.

Dennis Carney
IBM Printing Systems


                                                                                                                                                   
                      Mike Sweet                                                                                                                   
                      <mike at easysw.com>        To:       "Hastings, Tom N" <hastings at cp10.es.xerox.com>                                            
                      Sent by:                 cc:       sm at pwg.org, ps at pwg.org, ipp at pwg.org                                                       
                      owner-ipp at pwg.org        Subject:  Re: IPP> 2 more significant proposed increases in conformance requirements  for the IPP   
                                                Document object spec                                                                               
                                                                                                                                                   
                      04/19/03 08:54 PM                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                                   




Hastings, Tom N wrote:
> ...
> 2. Add a REQUIRED way to the Get-Jobs operation for the client to get the
> Jobs following the limit requested in a previous request.
>
> So add the "start-after-job-id" (integer (0:MAX)) Operation attribute.

This is a nice addition, but has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH
DOCUMENT OBJECTS.  It doesn't belong here.  If anything, you should
put together a single, small spec that adds this functionality to
Get-Jobs separately.  A pain, but this single attribute is useful
on its own.

Also, you probably need to have a way to let the client know that
this attribute is supported, e.g.
"start-after-job-id-supported (boolean)"...

--
______________________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products                  mike at easysw.com
Printing Software for UNIX                       http://www.easysw.com







More information about the Sm mailing list