I recommend that these changes NOT be incorporated into a document
that is posted as an Internet-Draft until the group can do a
through review. I still do not understand the impact of UTF-8
and from the recent email on the PWG issue, I am not alone.
To expect responses in such a short time is unreasonable. I am
sure that the update you are working on will not be the final
document for Proposed Standard. We should have plenty of time
to properly resolve this issue.
Ron Bergman
Dataproducts Corp.
On Tue, 29 Jul 1997, Tom Hastings wrote:
> In order to avoid a flood of mail, I talked with Harry on simple
> solutions to the code set identification problem (Issues 111 and 112).
>
> We agreed on the following simple solutions which should satisy
> David Perkin's comment and the Area Directors warning not to leave
> the coded character set ambiguous to applications.
>
> I'm going to edit the following into the draft this afternoon
> in order to meet tommorrows deadline for the next Internet-Draft,
> unless I hear problems.
>
> Tom
>
> ISSUE 111 (restated): How does an application determine the coded character
> set for the objects and attributes that the agent generates (that cannot come
> from the job submitter)?
>
> The following 3 objects and attributes are in question:
>
> jmGeneralJobSetName object
> processingMessage attribute
> physicalDevice (name value) attribute
>
> Suggested solution: Use UTF-8 only for these 3 objects/attributes.
>
>
>
> ISSUE 112 (re-stated): How does a management application determine the
> coded character set for the per-job objects and attributes that are returned
> by the agent (whether submitted by the job submitter or defaulted by the
> agent when the job submitter does not supply).
>
> The following 19 per-job objects and attributes are in question:
>
> IETF Job object/attributes Equivalent IPP attributes
> -------------------------- -------------------------
> jmJobOwner object "job-originating-user"
> other, -
> unknown, -
> serverAssignedJobName, -
> jobName, "job-name"
> jobAccountName, -
> submittingServerName, -
> submittingApplicationName, -
> jobOriginatingHost, "job-originating-host"
> deviceNameRequested, "printer-uri"
> queueNameRequested, -
> fileName, "document-uri"
> documentName, "document-name"
> jobComment, -
> outputBin (name), -
> mediumRequested (name), "media"
> mediumConsumed (name), -
> colorantRequested (name), -
> colorantConsumed (name) -
>
>
> Suggested solution:
>
> Add a jobCodedCharSet job attribute that identifies the IANA character set
> that the agent is using to represent the job objects and attributes whether
> supplied by the job submitter or defaulted by the server/device when the job
> submitter does not supply. If the agent doesn't know what the coded
> character set that the job submitter used, the agent SHALL either (1) omit
> the jobCodedCharSet attribute or (2) return the value 'unknown(2)' as the
> value of the jobCodedCharSet attribute.
>
>
>