IPP Mail Archive: IPP> Re: IPP- Printer state

IPP Mail Archive: IPP> Re: IPP- Printer state

IPP> Re: IPP- Printer state

Puru Bish (purub@hotmail.com)
Thu, 12 Mar 1998 12:04:57 PST

Thanks, Tom for clarifying the issue.

I still have a question - should an IPP server behave the same
way even when it does not spool any job?

-PB

>From hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com Wed Mar 11 17:57:09 1998

>Yes, the Printer object implemented in a server object does accept the
>job even though the device is powered down.
>
>And the requester MAY get an indication that there is a problem,
because
>the job's OPTIONAL "job-state-reason" attribute that MAY be returned in
the
>Print-Job response containing the value: 'printer-stopped'
>(or 'printer-stopped-partly' in the case that only some of the fan-out
>printers are stopped). Unfortunately, the requeseter will NOT get this
>indication in the response, if the IPP Printer object does not
implement
>the OPTIONAL "job-state-reasons" attribute.
>
>The client can then query the Printer's "printer-state"
>and "printer-state-reasons" attribute and see that the "printer-state"
>is 'stopped' and the "printer-state-reasons" is 'error-shutdown'
>('warning-shutdown' if only some of the fan-out printers are shutdown).
>
>
>The explanation of the 'stopped' state on page 89 of the Model document
>says (in its entirity of two paragraphs):
>
>'5' 'stopped': If a Printer receives a job (whose required resources
are
>ready) while in this state, such a job SHALL transit into the pending
state
>immediately. Such a job SHALL transit into the processing state only
after
>some human fixes the problem that stopped the printer and after jobs
ahead
>of it complete printing. The "printer-state-reasons" attribute SHALL
>contain at least one reason, e.g. media-jam, which prevents it from
either
>processing the current job or transitioning a pending job to the
processing
>state.
>
>Note: if a Printer controls more than one output device, the above
>definition implies that a Printer is stopped only if all output devices
are
>stopped. Also, it is tempting to define stopped as when a sufficient
>number of output devices are stopped and leave it to an implementation
to
>define the sufficient number. But such a rule complicates the
definition
>of stopped and processing. For example, with this alternate definition
of
>stopped, a job can move from idle to processing without human
intervention,
>even though the Printer is stopped.
>
>
>
>Does the Model document need any futher clarification?
>
>Tom

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com