IFX Mail Archive: IFX> RE: IPP> REG - Proposal for "

IFX Mail Archive: IFX> RE: IPP> REG - Proposal for "

IFX> RE: IPP> REG - Proposal for "job-recipient-name" Job Template att ribute

From: Hastings, Tom N (hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com)
Date: Wed Sep 13 2000 - 14:59:26 EDT

  • Next message: Michael Sweet: "IFX> Re: IPP> REG - Proposal for "job-recipient-name" Job Template attribute"

    Michael,

    I don't understand the idea of adding a keyword. Wouldn't the operator or
    administrator have a name and so would use that name?

    Tom

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Michael Sweet [mailto:mike@easysw.com]
    Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2000 17:15
    To: Hastings, Tom N
    Cc: ipp (E-mail); QUALDOCS DL (E-mail)
    Subject: Re: IPP> REG - Proposal for "job-recipient-name" Job Template
    attribute

    "Hastings, Tom N" wrote:
    > ...
    > If the client omits this attribute in a create request, the printer
    > MAY use the "job-recipient-name-default" (name(MAX)) Printer
    > attribute value, unless it has not been configured by the
    > administrator, or MAY use the "authenticated user" name (see
    > [IPP-MOD] section 8.3), depending on implementation.
    > ...

    What if the default has not been configured? Will the -default
    attribute contain an empty string, or will it be passed as a
    no-value?

    I'm thinking this and the job-recipient-name attribute may need to
    be a type2 keyword | name(MAX), with keywords like:

        none
        administrator
        operator

    to specify no specific recipient or the current admin/operator for
    the device.

    > The "job-recipient-name-supported" (integer(0:255) Printer attribute
    > indicates the maximum length that the Printer will accept for the
    > "job-recipient-name" Job Template attribute without truncation. A
    > ...

    Since the client will likely not know how to shorten a name so that
    it remains unique, and since the recipient name will probably need
    to be a valid name on the destination system anyways, having an
    attribute that specifies the maximum number of significant characters
    isn't all that useful IMHO.

    Also, since the -supported attributes usually enumerate the supported
    values for an attribute, it might make more sense to name it
    "job-reciepient-name-max" instead.

    -- 
    ______________________________________________________________________
    Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products                  mike@easysw.com
    Printing Software for UNIX                       http://www.easysw.com
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Sep 13 2000 - 15:08:00 EDT