IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> REG - Proposal for "job-reci

IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> REG - Proposal for "job-reci

RE: IPP> REG - Proposal for "job-recipient-name" Job Template att ribute

From: Hastings, Tom N (hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com)
Date: Wed Sep 20 2000 - 16:56:35 EDT

  • Next message: Mike Bartman: "RE: IPP> REG - Proposal for "job-recipient-name" Job Template att ribute"

    Michael wrote:

    *However*, there are situations where you might want to send a
    document to someone but don't know their user name. *That's*
    what the operator/administrator keywords would address.

    TH> You mean you want to print a job for the operator but don't know the
    operator's name, i.e., you want the operator to be the job recipient? I'd
    be interested for an example situation of when an end user would want to
    print a job for the operator.

    TH> Or do you mean that you want the operator to somehow take the job and
    deliver it to the proper person, for which the submitter doesn't know the
    person's name? I guess that the operator would look at the first few pages
    and hope to find a person's name he/she recognizes?

    TH> Still confused.

    Tom

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Michael Sweet [mailto:mike@easysw.com]
    Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 07:18
    To: Hastings, Tom N
    Cc: ipp (E-mail); QUALDOCS DL (E-mail)
    Subject: Re: IPP> REG - Proposal for "job-recipient-name" Job Template
    attribute

    "Hastings, Tom N" wrote:
    > ...
    > Now I'm more confused. The purpose of "job-recipient-name" was NOT
    > notification, but indicating who was the intended recipient of the
    > hardcopy produced by a job when the intended recipient is different
    > ...
    > (lots of ways to use job-recipient-name to hand-deliver output to
    > the recipient deleted)
    > ...

    You can easily mark output for a different recipient using the new
    attribute. That's basically the same as sending a cover sheet with
    a fax, and will probably work well in current environments provided
    there is someone to look through and distribute them.

    *However*, there are situations where you might want to send a
    document to someone but don't know their user name. *That's*
    what the operator/administrator keywords would address.

    In addition, I think that we need to address the obvious extension
    of this new attribute to notifications. Why should IPP automate
    everything *except* for something as simple as notifying the
    recipient when a job is printed for him/her? A user should be
    able to subscribe to a printer object and have a notification
    sent whenever a job destined for him/her has been completed.

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



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Sep 20 2000 - 17:08:20 EDT