attachment
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Hi Bill,</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Here are some additional comments I
have, some of which might overlap with Jerry's:</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Line 113-117 Table of Content</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Please
resolve all the "</font><font size=2 face="Arial"><b>E</b></font><font size=1 face="Arial"><b>RROR</b></font><font size=2 face="Arial"><b>!
B</b></font><font size=1 face="Arial"><b>OOKMARK NOT DEFINED </b></font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">"</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Terminology Section:</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> <service>DocumentData
</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">
- the definition uses the term "Digital
Document" which should also be defined in this section.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> JobTicket
</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">
- should be removed, it's redundant here because
<service>JobTicket has all detailed definition for a JobTicket.</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Element
(first occurrence) </font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">
- should be removed. The second occurrence
of this term has more detail and is consistent with what's in the current
"MFD Overall"</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Section 5.2, first paragraph, line 383:</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Second
sentence: Remove the first, duplicated "the" and replace with
"of".</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Section 5.3.4.3, Processing Step 5:</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Remove
"the" from "a the".</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Section 6.3.1, line 625:</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Remove
"on" from "on in".</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Section 6.3.2, line 630:</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Is
the "System" referring to the MFD System Object and Service,
or simply the entire MFD system? If it's the MFD System Object and Servcie,
we agreed in the last meeting that System object does not have job-oriented
function. Let's change "</font><font size=2 face="Arial">Each Service
and the System</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">" to "</font><font size=2 face="Arial">Each
Service</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> in the System". </font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Section 6.3.3, requirement #2:</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> Remove
"the" from "the a".</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Section 9, the 2nd sentence:</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> I
think it's better to change it to: "Future MFD services should </font><font size=2 face="Arial">consider
the local site security policies for</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="Arial"> 1) the
use of industry standard security protocols (e.g. WS-Security), </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Arial"> 2) compliance
to Industry securitiy standards for Imanging and Hardcopy Devices,</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Arial"> </font>
<br><font size=2 face="Arial"> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">in
providing the desire level of </font><font size=2 face="Arial">MFD operational
and information security</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="Arial">Regards,</font>
<br><font size=2 face="Arial">-Nancy</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
Nancy Chen, PWG Vice-Chair<br>
Principal Engineer<br>
Solutions and Technology<br>
Oki Data<br>
2000 Bishops Gate Blvd.<br>
Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054<br>
Phone: (856)222-7006<br>
Email: Nancy.Chen@okidata.com</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td width=40%><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>wamwagner@comcast.net</b>
</font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Sent by: pwg-announce-bounces@pwg.org</font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">07/02/2010 05:05 PM</font>
<td width=59%>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">To</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">pwg-announce@pwg.org</font>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">cc</font></div>
<td>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Subject</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">[Pwg-Announce] Last Call - MFD Service
Model Requirements</font></table>
<br>
<table>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td></table>
<br></table>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>This is a reminder that the MFD Service Model Requirements
document is in PWG last call, and that this last call nominally expires
next week. Although this is a requirements document rather than a specification,
failure to satisfy the PWG process on this document will act to stall progress
on the multiple MFD Service specifications now being worked on. We sincerely
request that members provide comments on this document or, if there are
no comments, a simple statement that the document has been read.<br>
</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>Many thanks,<br>
</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>The MFD Working Group<br>
</font></tt>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>----- Original Message -----<br>
From: wamwagner@comcast.net<br>
To: pwg-announce@pwg.org<br>
Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 11:33:45 PM<br>
Subject: [Pwg-Announce] Last Call - MFD Service Model Requirements<br>
</font></tt>
<br>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>All,<br>
</font></tt>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>This is an announcement to begin the Last Call process
for the "Multifunction Device Service Model Requirements" statement.
This document is a "clear statement of requirements for the standard
to be produced" and is required by the PWG Process (ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/general/pwg-process-30.pdf)
in conjunction with generating a standard. There will be, in fact, some
ten MFD Service Model standards. Two of these have had the requirements
statements incorporated in the standard and have already been advanced
to PWG Candidate Standard. The MFD Working Group has decided that an integrated
requirements statement would not only be more efficient, but would best
reflect the consistent approach to modeling the different MFD imaging and
ancillary services. The Last Call will close on Friday July 9.<br>
</font></tt>
<br>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>Please review this document, accessible at ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/mfd/wd/wd-mfdreq10-20100609
and provide your comments (or statement of no comments) to the MFD mail
list (mfd@pwg.org). As identified in the PWG Process Document, the "requirements
statement is important as it leads to a clear, common understanding of
the goals, provides a guide for developing the standard, and can be used
as a final test to measure the completeness of the resulting specification."
All comments will be addressed and resolved prior to the statement being
put up for ballot. Note that PWG approval of this requirements statement
is required before the remaining MFD specifications can be approved.<br>
</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>Thanks,<br>
</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>Bill Wagner/Peter Zehler<br>
</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>--<br>
This message has been scanned for viruses and<br>
dangerous content by MailScanner , and is<br>
believed to be clean.<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
pwg-announce mailing list<br>
pwg-announce@pwg.org<br>
https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/pwg-announce<br>
</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>--<br>
This message has been scanned for viruses and<br>
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is<br>
believed to be clean.<br>
</font></tt>
<br>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>_______________________________________________<br>
pwg-announce mailing list<br>
pwg-announce@pwg.org<br>
https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/pwg-announce</font></tt>
<br>
<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.