> >I support Scott's view. Let's keep moving down the path we are on -- get the >protocol right, >then do whatever mappings we think are appropriate as a second step. I don;t >think that we >could standardize on the Microsoft approach because they are passing >Microsoft >internal >data structures around. > > >Yes. but that's happenig only in one case, and it only contains user id and a >couple of other basic job properties. It would take me at most 15 minutes of >coding to change that structure to its IPP equivalent. > >Babak