I suggest that since, as you have observed, the PWG spends so much time
revisiting decisions that have been made, we not revisit the IPP
notification requirements. They were based on a set of scenarios that
Carl-Uno posted to the mail list and that were discussed in some detail. The
scenarios are still available on the site.
I would also observe that there has been talk of "decisions" made at
meetings (which participants assumed were final) which were not perhaps not
fully publicized on the mail list. In an IETF context, group participants
that do not attend the face to face meetings have a valid point in arguing
that no such decisions were ever made.
William A. Wagner (Bill Wagner)
Director of Technology
From: Jay Martin [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2000 1:40 PM
Subject: Re: IPP> machine readable etc. - why Harry is right
This thread just keeps getting more and more interesting.
> If I recall correctly, Harry's approach was morphed into the not
> Get because it did not address the established "requirement" that IPP
> notification allow notification of recipients other that the client
> submitting the job and at the time that the client was submitting the job.
> The argument that third party notification and notification subscriptions
> were not necessary was not accepted for IPP in general, but may be quite
> valid for QualDocs. As such, this may be pursued in conjunction with the
> QualDocs definition.
I'm a printing customer interested in this thing called IPP.
Would someone be so kind as to elucidate the compelling reasons
and benefits for having multiple notification recipients. I
guess I understand the concept. I just don't quite see the value.
Please be patient and contribute what you can to this thread,
since it will likely be referenced later on when real customers
ask these kinds of questions, and it would be nice to have the
summary background and rationale in a small, digestable format.
(Have you ever seen a customer choke when you hand them a copy
of the IPP spec? It's not a pretty sight, I assure you. ;-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 17 2000 - 14:07:24 EDT