attachment
<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">Ira,<div><br></div><div>I dislike using the term in the definition - makes for circular definitions. Seems like we are talking about a transport mechanism.</div><div><br></div><div>And while we do normally focus on networking the existence of IPP USB also can allow non-traditional data paths to use our stuff.</div><div><br></div><div>Finally, "attributes" has specific meaning in both IPP and XML, so how about "data elements"?</div><div><br></div><div>That would make the definition:</div><div><br></div><blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div>Protocol Binding: The combination of a transport mechanism with a set of message formats, operations, and data elements that implement an abstract information model and associated set of abstract operations and data elements.</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>and for the IPP Binding definition in IPP Scan and IPPINFRA:</div><div><br></div><div><blockquote style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;">IPP Binding: The Internet Printing Protocol implementation of an abstract information model and associated set of abstract operations and data elements.</blockquote></div><div><br></div><div>Thoughts?</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>On Aug 13, 2014, at 9:05 PM, Ira McDonald <<a href="mailto:blueroofmusic@gmail.com">blueroofmusic@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite">Hi,<br><br>There are hundreds of self-contradictory, informal definitions <br>of "protocol binding" around the Internet. Many IETF RFCs<br>use this term just as we do in PWG, but none define it (that<br>I've found so far).<br><br>The following excerpt from WSDL/1.1 is illustrative of the<br>conventional computer science use of "protocol binding":<br><br>"Abstract: WSDL is an XML format for describing network <br>services as a set of endpoints operating on messages <br>containing either document-oriented or procedure-oriented <br>information. The operations and messages are described <br>abstractly, and then bound to a concrete network protocol <br>and message format to define an endpoint. Related concrete <br>endpoints are combined into abstract endpoints (services). <br>WSDL is extensible to allow description of endpoints and <br>their messages regardless of what message formats or <br>network protocols are used to communicate."<br><br>Thus, my proposed definition:<br><br><br>Protocol Binding: The combination of a network protocol <br>with a set of message formats, operations, and attributes <br>that constitutes a concrete data model for implementation <br>of an abstract information model and an associated set of <br>abstract operations and attributes.<br><br><br>The above definition fits the usage of this term in every <br>IETF RFC that I looked at this evening (several dozen).<br><br>Cheers,<br>- Ira<br><br><br>Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)<br>Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG<br>Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG<br>Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group<br>Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG<br>IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB<br>Blue Roof Music / High North Inc<br><a href="http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic">http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic</a><br>http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc<br>mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com<br>Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094<br>Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>ipp mailing list<br>ipp@pwg.org<br>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp<br></blockquote><br><div>_________________________________________________________<br>Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair<br></div><br></div></body></html>