PMP Mail Archive: RE: PMP> Localization changes to Printer MIB

PMP Mail Archive: RE: PMP> Localization changes to Printer MIB

RE: PMP> Localization changes to Printer MIB

Caruso,Angelo (Angelo_Caruso@wb.xerox.com)
Wed, 11 Jun 1997 14:49:41 PDT

Bob,

> These are all new objects that don't change the functionality of the
existing objects.
> The change being proposed pulls out some of the current functionality of
> prtGeneralCurrentLocalization and puts it in
prtGeneralStaticLocalization. The
> problem that I see this causing is what happens when a customer
connects their new
> printer and tries to manage it with their existing management
software (we know that
> customers tend to update their software much less frequently than
they add printers).
> If they try to set the new printer's localization, they will find
that it is only partially
> localized.
>
> This change breaks existing software; therefore, it needs more
thought before it
> goes into the Printer MIB.

I talked with Ira this afternoon and want to try and clarify this a
little more. Ira's laptop just died so you won't see any mail from him
for a few days. My understanding of Ira's proposal:

1) All objects localized according to prtGeneralCurrentLocalization
would continue to be localized according to that object (with their
SYNTAX changed to PrtCurrentLocaleString for clarity).
2) All objects localized according to prtConsoleLocalization would
continue to be localized according to that object (with their SYNTAX
changed to PrtConsoleLocaleString for clarity).
3) Objects suitable for static localization (e.g. prtInputName) would
be localized according to the new object prtGeneralStaticLocalization
(with their SYNTAX changed to PrtStaticLocaleString for clarity).
4) Objects not suitable for localization (e.g. prtInputMediaName and
prtLocalizationLanguage) would remain forever unlocalized (with their
SYNTAX changed to PrtEnglishASCIIString for clarity).

Your statement above, "The change being proposed pulls out some of the
current functionality of prtGeneralCurrentLocalization and puts it in
prtGeneralStaticLocalization", is NOT what Ira is proposing. The new
object prtGeneralStaticLocalization would apply ONLY to objects which
are currently unlocalized. The prtGeneralCurrentLocalization object,
which currently provides only a partial localization, would continue
to provide exactly the same partial localization.

Thanks,
Angelo