IPP Mail Archive: RE: RE: RE: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests

IPP Mail Archive: RE: RE: RE: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests

RE: RE: RE: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests

Paul Moore (paulmo@microsoft.com)
Tue, 9 Jun 1998 15:40:12 -0700

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carl Kugler [SMTP:kugler@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 1998 3:13 PM
> To: ipp@pwg.org
> Subject: Re: RE: RE: IPP> Identifying jobs in requests
>
> > I think that there is a difference between meta-level things like
> charset
> > and language and real attributes like job-id.
> >
> > I think we should pull all URIs from the IPP model. The only place they
> > should appear in in the (non-existant) 'IPP on HTTP implementation
> rules'.
>
> That's a bigger change that what I'm proposing. I'm for leaving them in
> responses, to indicate printer-uri-supported, uri-security-supported,
> job-uri, job-printer-uri, and for print by reference. In a response
> you're supplying a reference to be used as a target in future operations.
> That's different than telling the target what the target is, which is what
> happens when we embed targets in requests.
[Paul Moore] Actually telling the target what the target is not the
main issue (it is , I agree, redundant). In fact my understanding is that
the printer-URI is not sent as an attribute in , say, a createjob request.
Rather the URI is implicit in the request (since the command arrives at the
right place). The real issue is that the reference generated by the printer
(job-URI) must make sense in the address space of the client (so that it can
use it). This works well for some adressing schemes but not for others.
> >
> > This is the only way we can make transport independance work
>
> Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI) can be used on many different
> transports (though not all transports). But IPP is the Internet Printing
> Protocol, so I think identifying resources by network location (URL) is
> reasonable.
[Paul Moore] Aha - so you are in the 'let there be IPP for Internet
and something else for other scenarios' camp. There is also, I am sure you
are aware, the 'IPP is just a convenient name, lets use it on all
transports' camp.
> >