IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> Editorial - IPP Model - Print-Job

IPP Mail Archive: RE: IPP> Editorial - IPP Model - Print-Job

RE: IPP> Editorial - IPP Model - Print-Job Attribute groups [RFC 2911]

From: Hastings, Tom N (hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com)
Date: Tue Jan 09 2001 - 20:11:28 EST

  • Next message: Victor J. Lombardi: "Re: IPP> Editorial - IPP Model - Print-Job Attribute groups [RFC 2911]"

    I'm keeping track of all comments on the RFC 2910 and 2911 for the next time
    we publish it. So please send any such comments as Harry has done to the
    IPP DL and I'll acknowledge and incorporate into my copy for next
    publication.

    In order to avoid indentation errors next time with the RFC editor, I'm
    going to include the .3 inch indentation in the .doc file for the
    proportional text versions as well. Then whenever we produce the I-D in
    .txt form, it will be conforming to the IETF formatting requirements.

    Thanks,
    Tom

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Hastings, Tom N [mailto:hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com]
    Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 17:08
    To: Harry Lewis
    Cc: ipp@pwg.org
    Subject: RE: IPP> Editorial - IPP Model - Print-Job Attribute groups
    [RFC 2911]

    Harry,

    Yes, I agree that Group 3 is the data, and is not attributes, so it would
    have been better to have just deleted the "of attributes" phrase, so it
    would have read:

    The following groups are supplied as part of the Print-Job Request:

       Group 1: Operation Attributes
       Group 2: Job Template Attributes
       Group 3: Document Content

    About your comment on the indentation, I agree that the indentation in the
    RFC 2911 .txt version is mis-leading. The .txt file that we published as
    the INTERNET-DRAFT had the text you refer to at the left margin. The RFC
    editor moved all text, except headers, right 3 spaces. However, for this
    paragraph, they moved it right 6 spaces, instead of 3, and we (I) missed
    that in proof-reading the .txt from the RFC Editor.

    Regrettably under IETF rules, once an RFC is published, it cannot be
    corrected (except to publish a new RFC with a new number that obsoletes or
    updates a previously published RFC).

    Sorry,
    Tom

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Harry Lewis [mailto:harryl@us.ibm.com]
    Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 07:31
    To: hastings
    Cc: ipp@pwg.org
    Subject: IPP> Editorial - IPP Model - Print-Job Attribute groups

    Tom, I'm reading RFC2911 (IPP Model). In section 3.2.1.1 Print-Job
    Request, something seems less than coherent. Basically, it reads... "The
    following groups of attributes are supplied as part of the Print-Job
    Request:

       Group 1: Operation Attributes
       Group 2: Job Template Attributes
       Group 3: Document Content

    Is it correct to refer to Document Content as an attribute in this manner?

    Also, the continuation of 3.2.1.1 after the first sentence in "Group 3"
    (The client MUST supply the document data to be processed)... should not
    be indented under the "Group 3" sub-heading as it appears to summarize the
    entire section (3.2.1.1).
    ----------------------------------------------
    Harry Lewis
    IBM Printing Systems
    ----------------------------------------------



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 09 2001 - 20:12:45 EST