IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeti

IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeti

RE: IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeting (RE: IPP> ADM - The IPP Notification I-Ds will now go the IESG)

From: Hastings, Tom N (hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com)
Date: Tue Aug 15 2000 - 21:09:29 EDT

  • Next message: Hastings, Tom N: "RE: IPP> New application of IPP"

    I'm neither for nor against having the client being able to request that
    machine readable option with mailto in addition to the text/plain.

    However, I think that one of the differences between the text/plain and the
    machine readable is that the Printer localizes the first (and has to anyway)
    and the Notification Recipient (email plug-in) has to localize the second.
    Some think that it is better for the Printer to localize, since it knows
    what state reasons it can generate. However, others say it is too much of a
    burden on the printer to localize to very many languages, so that the
    machine readable allows the Notification Recipient to pick up the slack.

    For example, a Printer only provides localization of Latin languages (or
    maybe only English). Then the Notification Recipient could do the
    localization for, say, Japanese. Another example, the Printer only provides
    Japanese in the mailto text/plain, so that the Notification Recipient could
    provide localization for any other language.

    Does allowing the Notification Recipient localize the messages make it more
    desirable to require the Printer to send machine consumable upon client
    request (in addition to the text/plain)?

    Tom

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Herriot, Robert [mailto:Robert.Herriot@pahv.xerox.com]
    Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2000 17:17
    To: jkm@underscore.com; Herriot, Robert
    Cc: IETF-IPP
    Subject: RE: IPP>NOT mailto feature from IETF meeting (RE: IPP> ADM -
    The IPP Notification I-Ds will now go the IESG)

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Jay Martin [mailto:jkm@underscore.com]
    Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2000 11:58 AM

    ...

    Why do you feel we need machine-readable components in an email msg?

    [rgh] My intent was to propose a simple solution for Machine Consumable
    content for "mailto", not to be an advocate. I hoped to hear a discussion
    of the pro's and con's on the DL.

    ... Why would anyone would *demand* relatively
    real-time notifications for print jobs outside of a firewall, anyway?
    ...

    [rgh} Suppose that you are printing from your office to a printer at home
    and you've put your home behind a firewall. You might want to know that
    Printing has completed successfully and call home if a problem occurs. The
    "mailto" Delivery Method would be a good choice in this case.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 15 2000 - 21:18:13 EDT