Ron,
Thanks for posting the JMP telecon minutes to the list as well as
on the server. Seems to make for more rapid digestion of this timely
information.
One portion of the minutes has me a bit worried:
> 31. Should we re-introduce jmJobDeviceIndex to handle configuration
> 2b?
>> No. A user or management application will never have to look
> at both the printer and the spooler, at the same time, for
> information regarding a specific job.
Sorry, but I don't have Tom's latest-greatest spec in front of me
to recall what "configuration 2b" is exactly, but the response sends
up a number of red flags for us at Underscore.
The wide variety of grossly disparate spooling systems found in the
average Enterprise today is not likely to change in the near future.
While DPA-based technology may solve some critical problems, it is
just that--yet another spooling system.
In our humble opinion, the *only* way to present accurate job status
information in a (typically) multi-platform environment is to tackle
the highly formidable task of corroberating the job data of all these
spooling systems, then presenting the results in some sort of
"normalized" manner.
So, in our view, a truly useful Job Monitoring application should be
expected to simultaneously examine job data in both the spooler(s) and
the printer to accurately depict the current state of a job.
Hopefully this view doesn't rock to many peoples' boats. ;-)
Opposing views are definitely welcome, too.
All in all, the progress on the Job MIB is most promising.
...jay
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-- JK Martin | Email: jkm at underscore.com --
-- Underscore, Inc. | Voice: (603) 889-7000 --
-- 41C Sagamore Park Road | Fax: (603) 889-2699 --
-- Hudson, NH 03015-4915 | Web: http://www.underscore.com --
----------------------------------------------------------------------