FIN Mail Archive: FIN> RE: Fin Device Capacity units

FIN> RE: Fin Device Capacity units

From: Harry Lewis/Boulder/IBM (harryl@us.ibm.com)
Date: Thu Nov 16 2000 - 11:23:42 EST

  • Next message: McDonald, Ira: "FIN> Add 'percent(19)' to 'PrtCapacityUnitTC' and 'PrtMarkerSuppliesUn itTC'"

    Ron, there's another question. We can indicate capacity (max current etc)
    for the finDevice, itself as well as the finSupplies associated with the
    finDevice. In some cases, I can see where a finDevice might have several
    types of supplies but in MANY cases, the finDevice will have one supply
    (consider a simple stapler). In this case, it seems the maxCapacity and
    currentLevel of the finDeivce would be identical to that of the finSupply,
    right?
    ----------------------------------------------
    Harry Lewis
    IBM Printing Systems
    ----------------------------------------------

    "Bergman, Ron" <Ron.Bergman@Hitachi-hkis.com>
    11/16/2000 09:04 AM

     
            To: Harry Lewis/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS, fin@pwg.org
            cc: "Bergman, Ron" <Ron.Bergman@Hitachi-hkis.com>
            Subject: RE: Fin Device Capacity units

    Harry,

    You are correct, we missed this!

    I will add "items(18)" to PrtCapacityUnitTC in the Printer MIB
    when it reaches the RFC Editor. This entry is already in
    PrtMarkerSuppliesSupplyUnitTC and it should have been added
    to both.

            Ron

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Harry Lewis/Boulder/IBM [mailto:harryl@us.ibm.com]
    Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 1:30 PM
    To: fin@pwg.org
    Cc: rbergma@hitachi-hkis.com
    Subject: Fin Device Capacity units

    It would appear that we overlooked adding fin types to the
    PrtCapacityUnitTC. The only units in PrtCapacityUnitTC are
    tenThousandthsOfInches(3), micrometers(4), sheets(8), feet(16),
    meters(17). How, then, are we
    to indicate the capacity or max capacity of a finisher device subunit such
    as a stapler?

    Also, it appears that, for simple finishers, it will be redundant to
    describe the capacity and max capacity in both the Device and Supply
    entries. (of course, more complex finishers may have multiple supplies and
    supply types). In this case, is the recommendation to just let the
    redundancy exist?

    FinDeviceEntry ::= SEQUENCE {
          finDeviceIndex Integer32,
          finDeviceType FinDeviceTypeTC,
          finDevicePresentOnOff PresentOnOff,
          finDeviceCapacityUnit PrtCapacityUnitTC,
          finDeviceMaxCapacity Integer32,
          finDeviceCurrentCapacity Integer32,
          finDeviceAssociatedMediaPaths OCTET STRING,
          finDeviceAssociatedOutputs OCTET STRING,
          finDeviceStatus PrtSubUnitStatusTC,
          finDeviceDescription OCTET STRING

    and also in the

    FinSupplyEntry ::= SEQUENCE {
          finSupplyIndex Integer32,
          finSupplyDeviceIndex Integer32,
          finSupplyClass PrtMarkerSuppliesClassTC,
          finSupplyType PrtMarkerSuppliesTypeTC,
          finSupplyDescription OCTET STRING,
          finSupplyUnit PrtMarkerSuppliesSupplyUnitTC,
          finSupplyMaxCapacity Integer32,
          finSupplyCurrentLevel Integer32,
          finSupplyColorName OCTET STRING
    ----------------------------------------------
    Harry Lewis
    IBM Printing Systems
    ----------------------------------------------



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 16 2000 - 11:32:39 EST