attachment-0001
<html><head><base href="x-msg://141/"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>On Jan 15, 2012, at 9:21 AM, Zehler, Peter wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Andale Mono'; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1; "><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; ">Why do we have a bunch of xxx-preferred attributes? It complicates the model with a bunch of attributes and is not general purpose enough to address all the possible conflicting attributes and values.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>The idea was to have a -preferred attribute for every job/document template attribute that could cause a conflict.</div><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Andale Mono'; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1; "><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><o:p></o:p></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; "><o:p></o:p></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; ">...</div></div></div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Andale Mono'; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1; "><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; ">I would prefer to handle “xxx-preferred” using the collection syntax. I think it is easier and requires fewer changes to the IPP encoding. Defining “attributes-preferred” as a collection of attributes and permitting any template attributes to be included would be a simple generalization. It would also allow a client to pick those attribute/values out to correct their request and not rely on printer substitution.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>I prefer (no pun intended) the collection attribute syntax rather than introducing another attribute group tag. In the definition for IPP, would you envision this being returned in the unsupported attributes group or in the job/document attributes group?</div><br><div apple-content-edited="true">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; "><div>__________________________________________________</div><div>Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair<br></div></span>
</div>
<br><br />--
<br />This message has been scanned for viruses and
<br />dangerous content by
<a href="http://www.mailscanner.info/"><b>MailScanner</b></a>, and is
<br />believed to be clean.
</body></html>