I would like to suggest the following agenda for the JMP meeting next
week.
I strongly recommend that all discussions and decisions relating to
the Job Monitor Project be included in a set of minutes for those
(such as ME) that are not able to attend the meeting. I would like
to be able to review the outcome in a timely manner prior to the next
meeting. Due to the lack of minutes for the JMP in the June and July
meetings, we have lost some important work.
1. Completion of the review of the proposed objects.
2. How does the object “jobDeviceUsed” relate to the other objects in
the accounting/status group? This relationship should be fully
defined relative to the other objects in the accounting group as
well as how it will be used by an end device (printer) and an
intermediate device (File server).
3. Discussion of the need for the “Job Parameters” objects.
- Which items in this group are only required for job submission?
- Do job submission parameters belong here?
- Which items in the group can move into the accounting group?
I propose that “jobCopiesRequested” be change to
“jobCopiesCompleted” and moved into the accounting group. The
remaining items should be removed.
4. What value does “jobName” add to the identification group? Is
this value sufficient to warrant the inclusion of this object?
I propose that this object be removed.
5. Are items #2 and #3 in the identification group needed? These
objects appear to provide only routing information. I do not
feel that routing information adds any value for job monitoring.
These objects do not add any significant information required
for job identification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Bergman
Dataproducts Corp
rbergma at dpc.com