[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 20:57:29 UTC 2017


Hi Bill,

I did send a No Comments response, because I had forgotten the complete loss
of the SHOULD recommendation imperatives.  Like Mike and Smith in past Last
Calls I can revise my response.

In recent years I've co-edited 4 Trusted Computing Group best practices
specs
and in all of these we used SHOULD in the standards sense.

In recent PWG documents, IPP Implementor's Guide 2.0 heavily uses SHOULD.

During the F2F when I acquiesced unhappily to the watering down of
conformance,
I was buried in Chrysler and SAE calls every morning and not thinking well.

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 3:41 PM, <wamwagner at comcast.net> wrote:

> Fine. I defer to Ira on this, although I thought that Ira had already send
> a No Comments response.   I do wonder if this position reflects on the  PWG
> 3D Print Job Ticket and Associated Capabilities v1.0 (PJT3D) document.
>
> Thanks, Bill Wagner
>
>
>
> *From: *Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com>
> *Sent: *Friday, May 19, 2017 2:48 PM
> *To: *William Wagner <wamwagner at comcast.net>; Ira McDonald
> <blueroofmusic at gmail.com>
> *Cc: *Kennedy, Smith (Wireless Architect) <smith.kennedy at hp.com>; PWG
> Semantic Model v3 Reflector <sm3 at pwg.org>; Paul Tykodi
> <ptykodi at tykodi.com>
> *Subject: *Re: HP Inc. has reviewed the JDFMAP specification and has
> comments
>
>
>
> 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
> <(734)%20944-0094>
> May-Dec: PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434
> <(906)%20494-2434>
>
>
>
> 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