IFX Mail Archive: Fwd: Re: Questions to be addressed...

IFX Mail Archive: Fwd: Re: Questions to be addressed...

Fwd: Re: Questions to be addressed...

Richard Shockey (rshockey@ix.netcom.com)
Wed, 24 Mar 1999 15:16:08 -0600

>From: U18209@aol.com
>Date: Wed, 24 Mar 1999 15:48:53 EST
>To: GK@dial.pipex.com
>Cc: rshockey@ix.netcom.com
>Subject: Re: Questions to be addressed...
>X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.j for Windows sub 15
>
>Graham-san
>
>I think finishing is one of important feature of QD.
>IPP and QD must offer job attributes for finishing in option.
>
>I could not find the mailing list address.
>I appreciate you to forward this message to ML.
>
>Regards.
>
>Toru MAEDA
>CANON Inc.
>>From Geneva
>
> >G. IPP offers a rich and robust set of job attributes for finishing
> >options. Since FAX is traditionally the distribution of 1 copy to a
> >recipient, is there a need to restrict the available IPP finishing options
> >in an IPP/DSM Base Profile?
>
> Where is the line between "presentation" and "finishing"? To the extent
> that "presentation" concerns rendering of the information actually
> transferred, I think that is in scope for QD. To the extent that
> "finishing" does not deal with transferred information, I think that is out
> of scope. (E.g. the idea that I should decline to send you a document
> because your machine won't staple it is, I think, rather far fetched.)
>
> In case it's not clear: I think we should NOT attempt to address finishing
> options.
>
>
> #g
>
> ------------
> Graham Klyne
> (GK@ACM.ORG)
>

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Richard Shockey
Shockey Consulting LLC
8045 Big Bend Blvd. Suite 110
St. Louis, MO 63119
Voice 314.918.9020
Fax 314.918.9015
INTERNET Mail & IFAX : rshockey@ix.netcom.com
eFAX 815.333.1237
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<