Semantic Model Mail Archive: RE: SM> IPP Document object spe

Semantic Model Mail Archive: RE: SM> IPP Document object spe

RE: SM> IPP Document object specification, March 14 2003 version, is avai lable for SM 3/20 telecon [much smaller zips]

From: Hastings, Tom N (
Date: Tue Mar 18 2003 - 14:09:30 EST

  • Next message: Hastings, Tom N: "SM> RE: My response to some of the 18 Document issues...Comments? [IS SUE 03 "job-mandatory-attributes" = REQUIRED]"

    For some reason the sizes of the clean version of the .PDF file is huge (3
    Mb) while the revision marked .pdf was much smaller. And of course the .doc
    files are always huge. However, zipping all of them separately helped a
    lot. Those who have to down load over a phone line this savings is

    So I've down loaded individual .zip files for each of the four flavors:

                   .pdf .doc -rev.pdf -rev.doc
    which are: 1152KB, 290KB, 694KB, and 307KB, respectively,
    compared to: 2786KB, 1925KB, 865KB, and 2007KB, respectively.
    ratio: 59%, 85%, 85%, 20%, respectively


    -----Original Message-----
    From: Hastings, Tom N []
    Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 16:12
    Subject: SM> IPP Document object specification, March 14 2003 version,
    is available for SM 3/20 telecon

    I've stored the 14 March 2003 version of the IPP Document object on the PWG
    server at:
    which are the same as:

    The version with revision marks is available at:

    The rest of the email message contains the 18 issues followed by the change
    log summary.

    The 14 March 2003 version contains the agreements reached at the last PWG
    face to face meeting in Maui and on subsequent SM telecons and email
    threads. This version also aligns with the 17 March 2003 version of the
    Semantic Model that Pete just posted.

    The issues will be reviewed during the PWG Semantic Model telecon, Thursday,
    March 20. There are 18 issues, mostly minor or just making sure you approve
    of the specific updates. However, issue #9 is significant.

    Here are the issues that are also embedded in the document:

    ISSUE 00: Or should we just delete "input-document-number" operation
    attribute when we republish pwg5100.4 without "document-overrides?

    ISSUE 01: OK: OK to rename Send-Data to Send-Document-Data to reflect the
    object on which it operates?

    ISSUE 02: OK to add Close-Job operation and to REQUIRE a Printer to support
    it, since PSI is using it?

    ISSUE 03: Should we make "job-mandatory-attributes" a REQUIRED attribute
    for a Printer to support (if it supports the Document object)? Otherwise,
    clients won't support it and will be stuck with the "ipp-attribute-fidelity"

    ISSUE 04: The "document-overrides" attribute is also useful in combination
    with the "pages-per-subset" attribute (see [pwg5100.4]) which divides up the
    Input Page stream concatenated across the Input Documents into separate
    Output Documents. For example, making every 10 Input Pages be a separate
    Output Document but the client only wants to staple the first Output
    Document. ISSUE 04: But what about Subset Finishing? Can we it be done
    without "document-overrides"?

    ISSUE 05: OK that when a Printer supports Page Overrides, that we REQUIRE
    the Printer to continue to support the "page-overrides" as an operation
    attribute in Send-Document and Send-URI as well as a Document Template

    ISSUE 06: OK that "document-container-summary" is only one level deep?

    ISSUE 07: Is the description of "document-container-summary" attribute OK?

    ISSUE 08: Are the conformance requirements for the
    "document-container-summary" attributes OK?

    ISSUE: 09: How can a Printer indicate which combinations of
    document-creator-application-name (name(MAX)),
    document-creator-application-version (text(127)), document-creator-os-name
    (name(40)), document-creator-os-version (text(40)),
    document-format-device-id (text(127)), document-format-version (text(127),
    document-format (mimeMediaType) and "document-natural-language
    (naturalLanguage) are supported?

    ISSUE 10: OK that "document-format-version" is REQUIRED for a Printer to

    ISSUE: 11: The problem with separating "document-format" and
    "document-format-version" is how can a Printer describe what versions are
    supported, since the versions have to be associated with the document

    ISSUE 12: 'PDF/X-1:2001': From the ISO standard that specifies PDF/X.
    ISSUE 12: Or should the official ISO standard number, part number and date,
    be used instead, e.g., "ISO nnnnn.n-2001"?

    ISSUE 13: The definition of "document-natural-language" in [rfc2911] and [pwg5100.4] 5.1.7 is single-valued. OK that this Document
    Description attribute isn't 1setOf? Or should we extend
    "document-natural-language" to 1setOf naturalLanguage) and keep the same
    name? Or change the name to "document-natural-languages"?

    ISSUE 14: TBD - Need to add the "xxx-default" and "xxx-supported" to Table
    14 that go with the Document Template attributes.

    ISSUE 15: TBD - Need to add the xxx-default and xxx-supported for each xxx
    in the IANA Registration of Document Template attributes.

    ISSUE 16: TBD - Need to add the xxx-default and xxx-supported for each xxx
    in the IANA Registration of Job Template attributes being defined.

    ISSUE 17: TBD - Need to list the keyword attribute values in the IANA
    Registration section. Do so by reference to the values registered for
    corresponding attributes.

    Here is the Change Log:
    Version 0.7, 14 March 2003, agreements from the Maui January PWG meeting and
    subsequent telecons:
            1. Fixed up the file naming and numbering to agree with the
    latest PWG process agreements.
            2. Updated the Abstract and Introduction to reflect the
            3. Fixed cross references to use the standard numbers as
    agreed, rather than mnemonic references.
            4. Deprecated the "input-document-number" operation attribute
    ([pwg5100.4] section 9.2.1 in the Create-Document Requests
            5. Renamed Send-Data to Send-Document-Data to more clearly
    reflect the scope of the operation.
            6. Added the REQUIRED Close-Job operation to close a job that
    contains Document objects. Using "last-document" still works too and the
    Printer MUST support both ways.
            7. Retained the idea that the Printer MUST NOT copy down any
    attributes supplied in the Job Creation operation to the Document object as
    observable in Document object query responses. Document objects inherit
    that effect from the Job object.
            8. Added the following operation and Document Description
    attributes: document-container-summary (collection),
    document-creator-application-name (name(MAX)),
    document-creator-application-version (text(127)), document-creator-os-name
    (name(40)), document-creator-os-version (text(40)),
    document-format-device-id (text(127)), document-format-version (text(127).
    The "document-container-summary" collection attribute may contain them, plus
    "document-format" and "document-natural-language".
            9. REQUIRED Printers to support "document-format-version"
    Document Description.
            10. Deprecated "document-overrides" and indicated that the
    agreement is to re-issue [pwg5100.4] without "document-overrides".
            11. Prefixed the following three Document Description attributes
    that are copies of Job Description attributes with "document-" so that no
    Document attribute has a "job-" prefix: "job-printer-uri" becomes
    "document-job-printer-uri", "job-uri" becomes "document-job-uri", and
    "job-id" becomes "document-job-id".
            12. Added the encoding for the "document-attributes-tag" as
            13. Updated the IANA Registration section, but still needs more

    Send any comments to the SM mailing list.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 18 2003 - 14:10:13 EST