Paul,
Sorry if that wasn't clear. 0 means that you are not interested at all, and
higher numbers indicate higher degree of interest.
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
-----Original Message-----
From: pmoore@auco.com [mailto:pmoore@auco.com]
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2000 2:13 PM
To: Ron Bergman
Cc: pwg-ipp@pwg.org
Subject: Re: ADM - IPP Priorities
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 : Wed Jun 07 2000 - 12:07:30 EDT