Harry,
I agree with Jay. deviceAlertCode should be conditionally-mandatory.
Where the condition is jobState is NeedsAttention.
Ron
On Thu, 22 May 1997, JK Martin wrote:
> Based on your analysis, I'd go for instantiating deviceAlertCode *only*
> if it is applicable (ie, jobState is NeedsAttention, etc).
>> ...jay
>> ----- Begin Included Message -----
>> From jmp-owner at pwg.org Thu May 22 19:27 EDT 1997
> From: Harry Lewis <harryl at us.ibm.com>
> To: <jmp at pwg.org>
> Subject: JMP> Instantiation
> Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 19:28:42 -0400
>> I would like to clarify something I think we agreed to in San Diego, but I'm
> not sure I understand it.
>> I think we said something like... all mandatory attributes must be
> "instantiated" as soon as a job becomes Pending. The idea, here, is that we
> can't predict what combinations of attributes an application might stuff
> together in a varbind so there must be a valid response to (at least) the
> mandatory set.
>> Meanwhile, we moved the alert code which would have been associated with state
> NeedsAttention out of the Job State Table and into the Attribute table... so,
> now I want to test the assumption by asking the question:
>> Is the deviceAlertCode attribute only valid while the state is
> needsAttention? Should the agent return unknown(-1) while in other
> states? Or would the row disappear from the Attribute table?
>> I think the answer is the row must be instantiated and the value -1 be
> returned, according to our agreement. This really doesn't seem very
> efficient, however, because there will be a deviceAlertCode row for every
> job in the Attribute table even though the vast majority of jobs will
> never need attention!
>> Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems
>>> ----- End Included Message -----
>