[SM3] HP Inc. has reviewed the JDFMAP specification and has comments

[SM3] HP Inc. has reviewed the JDFMAP specification and has comments

[SM3] HP Inc. has reviewed the JDFMAP specification and has comments

Ira McDonald blueroofmusic at gmail.com
Fri May 19 18:47:48 UTC 2017


Hi Bill and Smith,

I'll write a revised Last Call response from High North.

I object very strongly to the complete removal of the section 2.1
Conformance
Terminology, instead of the dropping of MUST and REQUIRED.

The former section 5 Conformance Requirements should be named
Implementation Recommendations.

Within section 5, the word MUST should be changed to all-caps SHOULD.

All of which would be consistent with many Best Practices specs from IETF,
ITU-T, and ISO.

Losing the all-caps SHOULDs is a critical fault in the current text.

Cheers,
- Ira


Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
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
Jan-April: 579 Park Place  Saline, MI  48176  734-944-0094
May-Dec: PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434


On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 1:55 PM, <wamwagner at comcast.net> wrote:

> Hi Smith,
>
> Thank you for your comments. At this point, I am unsure whether Ira or I
> should address Last Call comments. However, since several of your comments
> relate to the updates I made, I will respond with my thoughts. At any rate,
> since Ira is very busy, I would be happy to take care of editorial issues,
> leaving technical issues to those more familiar with the subject.  Ira,
> please let me know if this is OK with you.
>
>    1. There are 3 sentences that start with "Originally”:- Yes. the
>    second and third instances can simply be removed, with it being clear the
>    original “Originally” still holds. Although, I am not fond of “originally”
>    since it is unclear when that was.  Perhaps the paragraph might start with
>    “Before the introduction of open Print standards…”?
>    2. All instances of "RFC 2911" should be changed to cite "RFC 8011". -
>    Yes, sorry I missed these.  A global change will work.
>    3. Should the title be something other than simply "Recommendations"?
>    -"Implementation Recommendations" would work, if that is preferred. I would
>    avoid "Conformance Recommendations" in a best practices document since it
>    sounds too much like a formal specification.
>    4. "Implementations of this Best Practices document conform to...- "
>    Well, I was trying to avoid formal conformance words. Perhaps it would be
>    better to use the wording at the start of the section “ implementations
>    that are in accord with this Best Practices document conform to the …”
>    5. "Implementations of this Best Practices document follow..." Again,
>    trying to avoid conformance terms. I do not see where “should” is
>    necessary. Perhaps it would be better “Implementations in accord with this
>    Best Practices document follow”.
>
>
>
> Thanks, Bill Wagner
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Kennedy, Smith (Wireless Architect) <smith.kennedy at hp.com>
> *Sent: *Thursday, May 18, 2017 10:57 PM
> *To: *PWG Semantic Model v3 Reflector <sm3 at pwg.org>; Kennedy, Smith
> (Wireless Architect) <smith.kennedy at hp.com>; Ira McDonald
> <blueroofmusic at gmail.com>; Paul Tykodi <ptykodi at tykodi.com>; William A
> Wagner <wamwagner at comcast.net>
> *Subject: *HP Inc. has reviewed the JDFMAP specification and has comments
>
>
>
> Greetings,
>
>
>
> A few editorial comments:
>
>
>
> * Section 3.1 : There are 3 sentences that start with "Originally, ...".
>
>
>
> * Section 3.1, line 272 : All instances of "RFC 2911" should be changed to
> cite "RFC 8011" (references in section 9 are already updated).
>
>
>
> * Section 5, line 795 : Should the title be something other than simply
> "Recommendations"? Like for instance "Implementation Recommendations" or
> "Conformance Recommendations"?
>
>
>
> * Section 6, line 841 : "Implementations of this Best Practices document
> conform to..." >>> "Implementations of this Best Practices document should
> conform to..." (missing should) ?
>
>
>
> * Section 7, line 858 and 862 : "Implementations of this Best Practices
> document follow..." >>> "Implementations of this Best Practices document
> should follow..." (missing should) ?
>
>
>
>
>
> Smith
>
>
>
> /**
>
>     Smith Kennedy
>
>     Wireless Architect - Client Software - IPG-PPS
>
>     Standards - IEEE ISTO PWG / Bluetooth SIG / Wi-Fi Alliance / NFC Forum
> / USB IF
>
>     Chair, IEEE ISTO Printer Working Group
>
>     HP Inc.
>
> */
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


More information about the sm3 mailing list