Paul,
According to Carl-Uno's original memo, more points indicates
a higher priority. You have only 21 points to distribute, so it
is not a priority number per-se.
Ron
pmoore@auco.com wrote:
> Before this thread continues can somebody please say whether high numbers are
> high or low priority ie - is 0 the hightes or lowest
>
> Ron Bergman <rbergma@hitachi-hkis.com> on 06/02/2000 02:11:56 PM
>
> To: pwg-ipp@pwg.org
> cc: (bcc: Paul Moore/AUCO/US)
>
> Subject: Re: ADM - IPP Priorities
>
> Carl-Uno,
>
> I agree that notifications needs to remain the highest priority!
> I would also like to add Qualdocs to your list.
> Here is my ranking per your points system:
>
> 5 - Set 2 Operations
> 4 - Set 3 Operations
> 3 - Qualdocs
> 3 - Print Driver Download
> 3 - Open Source IPP Client
> 1 - Production Printing Attributes
> 1 - Document & Page Exceptions
> 1 - Resource Object
>
> The Set 2 and Set 3 operations have been in progress for too long. We
> need to
> make
> a final agreement as to their content and complete this effort!
>
> Qualdocs should not be a major effort. Seems that most of the work is
> already
> in
> place. This could be our "killer application" and with notifications
> almost
> complete
> this could be quickly formalized.
>
> Print Driver Download and an Open Source IPP Client will also provide a
> powerful
>
> edge to IPP.
>
> Ron Bergman
> Hitachi Koki Imaging Solutions
>
> "Manros, Carl-Uno B" wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > During the last part of our IPP meeting in New York, the problem was raised
> > that we have a number of subjects and documents that have not been
> > progressed lately, because we have had too many things going on in parallel,
> > and a high priority item for one company may be low priority for another.
> >
> > We are trying to now wrap up the discussions and documentation on IPP
> > Notifications, but there are several competing subjects after that. It does
> > not look too promising to get more face-to-face time on IPP during the PWG
> > meetings, so a subsequent phone conference discussed what we can do to make
> > some of the lower priority subjects move forward without having to involve
> > the whole group. However, it was decided to first try to get a better
> > picture of the priorities, so we can establish where we stand.
> >
> > Here is a list of "competing" IPP subjects, which I would like to get your
> > priorities for:
> >
> > - Print Driver Download (needs to get done quickly or may never happen)
> > Latest draft from Hugo Parra - May 25, 2000
> > - Resource Object (a possible extension/generalization of Printer Download)
> > DL discussion, no document yet
> > - Set 2 Operations (subject from last year) Latest draft in New York IPP
> > Package - February 3, 2000
> > - Set 3 Operations (subject from last year) Latest draft in New York IPP
> > Package - December 8, 1999
> > - Document & Page Exceptions (subject from last year) Latest draft in New
> > York IPP Package - May 8, 2000
> > - Production Printing Attributes - Latest draft in New York IPP Package -
> > May 9, 2000
> > - Open Source IPP Client - Discussion in New York (see message sent out
> > earlier today)
> >
> > I would like each of you to use a total of 21 points and allocate them on
> > the 7 subjects above. Higher points mean higher priority. For the subjects
> > for which you have put more than your average >3, I would also like you to
> > state whether you are prepared to take on to be a subgroup leader
> > (organizing phone conferences or separate meetings) and/or if you want to
> > take on being an editor for the draft document(s).
> >
> > Let us do this initially on a per expert basis; I expect that we can then
> > accumulate the votes and get averages per company if we still need that.
> >
> > Please note that this voting is not part of the IETF process, but anybody
> > involved in the PWG activities are welcome to give their input, either they
> > are PWG members or not.
> >
> > Further discussion of this subject will be held on the pwg-ipp DL, so if you
> > are not yet a member of that DL, please subscribe now and send your input to
> > that DL.
> >
> > I would like you to provide your input no later than June 13, so we can
> > discuss the results in the IPP phone conference on June 14.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Carl-Uno
> >
> > Carl-Uno Manros
> > Principal Engineer - Xerox Architecture Center - Xerox Corporation
> > 701 S. Aviation Blvd., El Segundo, CA, M/S: ESAE-231
> > Phone +1-310-333 8273, Fax +1-310-333 5514
> > Email: manros@cp10.es.xerox.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 02 2000 - 17:40:00 EDT