Some discussion notes.
163. some portion of the imaging service is performed by an entity within
the Cloud - simpler to discuss that this requires a portion of the flow to
cross a firewall.
181. Does not preclude use if device is network accessible.
379. registered by the device, or a subset.
385. update restricted to registered capabilities.
I have some security concerns with using a support all services model - lack
of Owner control.
Larry
From: cloud-bounces at pwg.org [mailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org] On Behalf Of
William A Wagner
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 12:19 PM
To: cloud at pwg.org
Subject: [Cloud] Cloud Imaging Requirements and Model
I have posted a modified and embellished from of Larry's Cloud Imaging
Requirements and Model document at:
ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/cloud/wd/wd-cloudimagingmodel10-20130425.pdfftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/cloud/wd/wd-cloudimagingmodel10-20130425.docx
This update to Sections 1-3 reflects the decisions at the last Cloud
Conference call to:
1. Concentrate on a Cloud Imaging model rather that just Cloud
Printing
2. Allow fanout from a Cloud Imaging Manager to multiple Cloud Imaging
Managers
3. Do changes identified in the last review of the Cloud Printing
Model document.
However, it reflects an approach somewhat different from Larry's and
possibly from Michael's in that it uses a Cloud Imaging Server actor that
can perform one or more Imaging Services, rather than separate Scan, Print
and Fax Services. Also, at this point, none of the Semantic Model services
are discarded.
Although I recognize that, in a binding, it may be desirable to "bucket"
services, it did not seem necessary in the general model, at least not at
this point. I request that the group consider this draft and that we
discuss the approach at Monday's Cloud Conference Call (3-5 or so, EDT)
Many Thanks,
Bill Wagner
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by <http://www.mailscanner.info/> MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/cloud/attachments/20130429/a5b71760/attachment-0002.html>