Below is an excerpt of my previous posting, slightly modified for
brevity, wherein I propose extending the hrPrtDetectedErrorState
definitions to improve our condition.
>Date: Thu, 12 Dec 96 16:52:59 MST
>From: "Harry Lewis <harryl@vnet.ibm.com>" <harryl@vnet.ibm.com>
>To: pwg@pwg.org
>Subject: PWG> hrPrtDetectedErrorState
>
>... preamble r
>
>Here are my initial recommendations for new (hrPrtDetectedErrorState)
>bit definitions:
>
> Tray Open
> Output Full
> Toner Cartridge Missing (bit) )
>
>Currently, our implementation maps Tray Open to Low Paper
> Output Full Service Requested
> Toner Cartridge Missing No Toner
>
>I have to imagine that other implementation work in a similar fashion and I'll
>bet interoperability testing would demonstrate differences in how we all do
>it!
There is nothing in this proposal that says I have defined the ultimate
set of mappings or achieved world peace. These are only derived from
real experience and only address our immediate needs.
At Stardust, I proposed this again, but the notion was rejected on the
basis of two main themes:
1. Since there has been ambiguity in this area in the past, it may
be less likely for software to ever be written as though it can
"trust" printer responses regarding these attributes.
2. If we try to define more "bits" we will inevitably fall short of
perfection and therefor will be right back where we are today,
finding some ambiguity somewhere, so why even try.
I'm restating my proposal clearly, one more time, in this context,
because, I am missing the point of why, if we're going to embark
on "standard mappings" wherein implementations may need to adjust,
we are so shy to take the opportunity to attempt to resolve known
ambiguity in a more deterministic fashion.
Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems