I favor the proposal to simplify.
1. I think we somewhat overkilled it in the first place
2. This was noticed by Keith Moore - Area Director
3. Several implementors have shared their experience regarding complexity,
confusion etc.
I agree now is the BEST time to make these corrections to the spec and I
believe the change is justified based on early implementation experience.
Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems
owner-ipp at pwg.org on 10/13/98 08:11:05 PM
Please respond to owner-ipp at pwg.org
To: cmanros at cp10.es.xerox.com
cc: ipp at pwg.org, HPARRA at novell.com
Subject: Re: IPP> Re: MOD OLD NEW Issue: Contradictory NLO req
Manros, Carl-Uno B wrote:
> ...
> I am hesitant to cut things out of the specs at this stage. What is
> the reaction among people who have already launched or are close to
> launch products?
Well, to be honest we shelved implementation of NLO until some of
these issues got resolved (the current implementation just uses the
current locale, which for CUPS covers 99% of all our users).
The proposed changes would definitely make things a lot simpler and
still support language changes "on the fly". I think it would be a
mistake *not* to make the changes before 1.0 is finalized, since once
it is finalized we're probably stuck with it as long as IPP is around...
--
______________________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products mike at easysw.com
Printing Software for UNIX http://www.easysw.com