IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> New CUPS 1.1 beta and set-job-att

IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> New CUPS 1.1 beta and set-job-att

RE: IPP> New CUPS 1.1 beta and set-job-attributes extension [why not use "job-sheets"?]

From: McDonald, Ira (imcdonald@sharplabs.com)
Date: Mon Mar 20 2000 - 23:11:16 EST

  • Next message: Jay Martin: "Re: IPP> New CUPS 1.1 beta and set-job-attributes extension [why not use "job-sheets"?]"

    Hi Michael,

    Thanks. You added a voice to mine (the one out in this
    wilderness on recent IPP WG Telecons) saying that 'collections'
    were not really a 'simple' extension.

    I have grave reservations about ANY future point version of
    IPP making support for the 'collection' syntax mandatory.
    Even with the latest 'legacy friendly' encoding proposals
    from Bob Herriot (thanks Bob), I'm not a fan of 'collections'.

    In essence, 'collections' are 'poor man's objects'. I still
    haven't heard the compelling case for why we wouldn't just
    use REAL objects (for example 'Resource' object, in the ISO DPA
    'document resource' sense of fonts, forms, logos, etc.).

    Cheers,
    - Ira McDonald, consulting architect at Sharp Labs America
      High North Inc

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Michael Sweet [mailto:mike@easysw.com]
    Sent: Monday, March 20, 2000 7:33 PM
    To: Hastings, Tom N
    Cc: IPP Mailing List
    Subject: Re: IPP> New CUPS 1.1 beta and set-job-attributes extension
    [why not use "job-sheets"?]

    "Hastings, Tom N" wrote:
    > ...
    > Wouldn't it be simpler to use these values in CUPS, rather than
    > introducing two new Job Template attributes?

    1. The PPE uses COLLECTIONS for this stuff
    2. Collections are still being defined.
    3. CUPS currently does not do anything with collections (it will
       store the raw data, but that is all)
    4. Without collections the job-sheets attribute cannot support
       what CUPS needs to do.

    Given those things, it is unlikely in the EXTREME that we will
    change our design this close to a final release.

    It is *possible* that we can change the names of the attributes
    to "job-sheets-*", however I am concerned that we might step on
    future attributes. Possible names:

        job-sheets-supported
        job-sheets-start-default
        job-sheets-end-default
        job-sheets-start
        job-sheets-end

    At least that would be in line with the IPP spec, but that also
    means we must support "job-sheets" and "job-sheets-default". I'm
    not sure how we would map that given the ambiguity in the spec...

    Another possibility might be to overload the "name" value to use
    "start,end" for the "job-sheets" and "job-sheets-default" attributes,
    however that might break clients that try to compare them against
    the "job-sheets-supported" values.

    In any case, any change we make now CANNOT include support for the
    PPE spec.

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



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 20 2000 - 23:17:54 EST