PMP Mail Archive: RE: PMP> URGENT: SYNTHESIS proposal on definition of OCTET STRING toallow superset of ASCII

PMP Mail Archive: RE: PMP> URGENT: SYNTHESIS proposal on definition of OCTET STRING toallow superset of ASCII

RE: PMP> URGENT: SYNTHESIS proposal on definition of OCTET STRING toallow superset of ASCII

Bob Pentecost (bpenteco@boi.hp.com)
Fri, 25 Jul 1997 15:47:13 -0600

Tom,

>=20
> ----------
From: Tom Hastings[SMTP:hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 1997 4:40 AM
> To: pmp@pwg.org
> Cc: Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no; Keith Moore
> Subject: PMP> URGENT: SYNTHESIS proposal on definition of OCTET =
STRING toallow superset of ASCII
>=20
<stuff deleted>

> I suggest as a SYNTHESIS proposal=20
> which should make all the commentors happy and follows the Area =
Director's
> advice (at the cost of a single object):
>=20
> 1. Add a simple object to the General table that specifies the static
> code set for the OCTET STRING objects in question (those that are not=20
> already indicated as being subject to the localization mechanism in =
the=20
> Printer MIB)
> 2. The object has MAX-ACCESS of read-write
> 3. The object has MIN-ACCESS of read-only
> 4. Lets just add the object to the MANDATORY General Group, rather =
than=20
> making the object OPTIONAL and putting it in a separate group and=20
> specifying that US-ASCII SHALL be used when the object is omitted.

What do you mean that the object is mandatory, but then you say that =
"US-ASCII shall be used when the object is omitted"? How can a mandatory =
object be omitted?

> 5. The default value for the object is specified as UTF-8 (enum 106)
> to follow the IAB recommendation.
> 6. Lets call the new object: prtGeneralStaticCodeSet
>=20
>=20
> The complete text of this SYNTHESIS proposal affects:
>=20
<complete text deleted>
>=20

Bob