P1394 Mail Archive: Re:P1394>EMAIL Poll

P1394 Mail Archive: Re:P1394>EMAIL Poll

Re:P1394>EMAIL Poll

Shigeru Ueda (ueda@pure.cpdc.canon.co.jp)
Fri, 27 Feb 1998 18:03:10 +0900 (JST)

1. Please rank the following proposals according to your interest level
using the following scale ( 10 = High level
of interest vs. 0 = No interest).

( 3 ) 1284.4 Over Data FIFO Architecture (DFA)
( 0 ) 1284.4 Over SBP-2
( 5 ) Direct Printing Protocol - (current PWG-C proposal 0.71)
( 7 ) SBP-2 Native - (current PWG proposal 0.1c)
( 7 ) HPT

2. Please provide background comments on your ranking.

.1284.4 Over Data FIFO Architecture (DFA)
Though the document describing DFA architecture is very poor, there is
still the possibility that DFA can offer the true symmetrical

.1284.4 Over SBP-2
I think this is not good (inefficient) as I explained at the PWG
meeting held in Nashua last June..

. Direct Printing Protocol
There is the possibility that DPP can offer true symmetrical transport.
But DPP is discussed at PWG-C and the requirement of PWG-C is different
from the one of PWG,so it will be difficult to make DPP to meet the
requirement of PWG.

.SBP-2 Native - (current PWG proposal 0.1c)
I think SBP-2 Native is the good (not the best) solution for PC-printing.
But some amendment will be needed.(Especially to "Abort task" method)

I believe that HPT is still the good solution for PC-printing as SBP-2
Native.it can offer the same level of service that 1284.4 offers.

Why do you prefer to use the given solution?
Why should others consider the given solution?
Does the the given solution meet the existing requirements?
What issues are you aware of (if any) with the given solution?

What is your opinion on the best way to move the discussion forward?
I think that PWG1394 should concentrate to PC-printing only.
SBP-2 is the good transport as far as it is used between PC(initiater)
and Devices(target) on 1394 bus.But it will be also true that many
Japanese vendors will not use SBP-2 based protocol for their low cost
scanners,cameras, etc.. That is why over 30 vendors in Japan are
discussing DPP as the transport for the peripherals of consumer market
at PWG-C.
So,PWG1394 should concentrate to PC-printing.
If there is the printer which wants to talk to Non-PC device like
low-cost scanner or digital camera,he should talk to by using DPP.
That means that the printer which wants to talk to PC and Non-PC device
should have more than 1 protocol.

3) Opinions on multiple printing protocols;

( ) There should be ONLY 1 printing protocol in any case and any
( X ) 2 protocols are ACCEPTABLE if necessary for different
( ) I PREFER more than 2 protocols
( ) Other (describe)__________________

Canon inc .
Office Design Dept.313

Sigeru Ueda

E-mail : ueda@pure.cpdc.canon.co.jp