PMP Mail Archive: Re: PMP> Pull Print channel information

PMP Mail Archive: Re: PMP> Pull Print channel information

Re: PMP> Pull Print channel information

harryl@us.ibm.com
Wed, 28 Jul 1999 13:22:48 -0600

Good observation, David. I got carried away bringing IPP into the discussion.
The problem was really that, if you were doing pull print via HTTP (non-IPP)
there is no way to indicate which url schemes you can send. Thus, I should have
just asked for a new channel types chHTTPPull with multiple keywords. Ira has
also asked for chEMail.

I never meant to ripple the current draft.

I WOULD appreciate a timely response on the type-2 enum from PWG, however after
we hash this out and see a proposal.

Harry Lewis
IBM Printing Systems
harryl@us.ibm.com

David_Kellerman@nls.com on 07/28/99 11:35:45 AM

To: pmp@pwg.org
cc: David_Kellerman@nls.com
Subject: Re: PMP> Pull Print channel information

Harry, I'm a little vague on where IPP is right now, so bear
with me. But...

The prtChannelInformation data is just supposed to provide a
"bootstrap." In the case if IPP, just enough information to
fire up an IPP connection -- then ask the IPP service what its
more detailed characteristics are. The rule was, essentially,
"if you don't need the information to establish the
protocol-specific connection, it doesn't belone in the
prtChannelInformation."

This two-step process was always explicit in the design of the
prtChannelInformation (at least in my mind). It wasn't, for
example, intended to be something like the IPP directory entry,
that attempts to characterize the service.

So I don't see any reason to change Tom and Ira's chIPP
definition.

David

:: David Kellerman Northlake Software 503-228-3383
:: david_kellerman@nls.com Portland, Oregon fax 503-228-5662