I'm a bit confused: I had the (apparently flawed) impression that the plan
was to deprecate, for a client, using the "last-document" operation
attribute entirely--that is, say the "correct" way to say a job was done
was to do Close-Job. If we do that, we will by definition deprecate the
special case you're discussing below, right? Am I thinking of PSI or maybe
Since deprecation is only a suggestion, might it make sense to deprecate
"last-document" entirely? (The Printer will still have to support it, but
we're encouraging clients to move to Close-Job.) Do we want to make such a
"Hastings, Tom N"
<email@example.com To: firstname.lastname@example.org
.xerox.com> cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Sent by: Subject: SM> 1 more significant proposed conformance change to the IPP Documen t object spec
04/21/03 10:08 AM
In going over my notes I discovered one more significant conformance
proposed change for the IPP Document object from Thursday's April 17,
telecon. This proposal will also go through the two-week comment period.
1. DEPRECATE the way a client can close a Job by supplying an empty
Send-Document operation supplying the "last-document" = 'true' operation
attribute for a Job created with Create-Job and any of (1)
Create-Document/Send-Data, (2) Send-Document, and/or (3) Send-URI. When
Printer accepts this no-data Send-Document operation with "last-document"
'true' the Printer MUST set the still REQUIRED "last-document" Document
Description attribute. Instead, the client SHOULD use the new Close-Job
operation (which also sets the "last-document" Document Description
The Printer MUST continue to support this method of closing a job with an
empty Send-Document request for backward compatibility with existing
As with the other two mail messages on significant conformance requirements
changes, I will not edit this comment into the spec until we reach
on Friday, May 1.
Please send comments.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 21 2003 - 19:14:39 EDT