attachment
<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">Pete,<div><br></div><div><div><div>On Feb 11, 2014, at 3:45 PM, Zehler, Peter <<a href="mailto:Peter.Zehler@xerox.com">Peter.Zehler@xerox.com</a>> wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Impact;
panose-1:2 11 8 6 3 9 2 5 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Andale Mono";}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.apple-style-span
{mso-style-name:apple-style-span;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Mike,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">First, some workflows require push scan. That does not mean push scan == workflow. I do not consider scan to DropBox, SkyDrive or Flickr to be workflows but
they are none the less useful “software optimizations”. Although a “fire and forget” aspect of the feature might be considered more than just an optimization.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>In the case of those services, I would expect you would need to include credentials in the URIs, and that's not something I think we want to encourage...</div><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Second, I expect that certain workflow Apps will only show scanners that can potentially deliver scans directly to the destination. Pull only scanners are
excluded from consideration.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Why would they exclude them? Are there security or other reasons?</div><div><br></div><div><blockquote type="cite"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
As I said, I can live with a Boolean since that will narrow the field to at least the scanners capable of delivering scans directly to a destination.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>If we really think push scanning is so important, we should make it required. If we think it is a useful optimization, it can stay recommended. Either way I don't see the need to include the schemes in the TXT record - you are standing/sitting in front of the MFD and it should just work!</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">The reason the schemes would be of interest is that finding a scanner capable of “remote copy” (i.e., scan
to ipp/ipps) might be of interest.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Please, let's not bring that up again. It is useful for workflow but we are not trying to create a copy-like service interface through scan, just as we didn't want to do it with faxout or with print. We collectively chose to keep a separate copy service for that purpose, and there was no interest in doing an IPP Copy Service spec because initiating copy from a client is just an interesting edge case.</div><div><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">A scan-to-email scanner might also be interesting for a client to find.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Scan-to-email can be done a bunch of ways, but I would say using my mobile device to do a direct scan to email is an edge case. More likely I'll want to have a copy of the document on my device as well and that isn't something push scan will give me.</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I would think that a push scanner could be depended upon to support http/https. Which leaves ftp, ftps and smb. I see some workflow solutions using
hot folders that would benefit from that information but that is not a primary concern.
</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>For write access, I would guess that SMB and FTP are going to be the general favorites over HTTP, as those services generally have write access enabled by default while HTTP requires special configuration or third-party solutions that have been configured accordingly.</div><div><br></div><div>
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: 'Andale Mono'; border-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; 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-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">_________________________________________________________<br>Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair</div></span></span>
</div>
<br></div></body></html>