RE: PMP> New MFP Alert Groups Specification Available

From: McDonald, Ira (imcdonald@sharplabs.com)
Date: Sat Nov 18 2006 - 12:51:38 EST

  • Next message: Paul Tykodi: "Printer Status - Web Server versus MIB (was: RE: PMP> New MFP Alert Groups Specification Available)"

    Hi Stuart,

    With your example range (4) below (affects scan and fax,
    but not print) you have neatly shown why I think that the
    ranges are no help. When you add a document transform
    function, an email function, an instant messaging function,
    etc., these combination ranges become impractical.

    We are overloading right-most subunit index to specify
    function (loosely 'imaging device').

    But the ambiguity goes away when there's an XML Schema
    or a MIB or whatever that _does_ expose associations of
    device and service with subordinate subunits - because the
    one-to-many from subunit "up" is explicit. That's what
    the current WIMS/SM Service and Device objects and my
    several drafts of an Imaging System MIB do.

    I suggest we replace this appendix with a "Rationale for
    Design Alternatives" appendix (as in IPP PSX spec) and
    explain why ranges of subunit indices is impractical
    and not extensible.

    Cheers,
    - Ira

    Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
    Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
    PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
    phone: +1-906-494-2434
    email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
    -----Original Message-----
    From: pmp-owner@pwg.org [mailto:pmp-owner@pwg.org]On Behalf Of Stuart Rowley
    Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 3:27 PM
    To: Bergman, Ron; pmp@pwg.org
    Subject: RE: PMP> New MFP Alert Groups Specification Available

    Ron,
     
    Thanks for posting the changes so quickly.
     
    I am still a little concerned that the case of a subunit used by multiple
    functions is not clear. We discussed the subunits that use the print
    function and the fax function as being in the print function index range,
    but what about the example of a cover open which means the scan function is
    out and the (outbound) fax function is out, but the print function is
    unaffected? What range would an implementation use in this case?
     
    Maybe we need 4 ranges:
    1: affects print function alone or in combination with other functions (does
    not break current implementations)
    2: affects scan function exclusively
    3: affects fax function exclusively
    4: affects scan and fax function
     
    Thanks,
     
    Stuart
     
    Stuart Rowley
    Network Product Mgr.
    Kyocera Technology Development
    1855 Gateway Blvd. #400
    Concord, CA 94520
    stuart.rowley@ktd-kyocera.com
    V: 925.849.3306
    F: 925.849.3399
     
     
     

    From: pmp-owner@pwg.org [mailto:pmp-owner@pwg.org] On Behalf Of Bergman, Ron
    Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 11:10 AM
    To: pmp@pwg.org
    Subject: PMP> New MFP Alert Groups Specification Available
     
    The latest MFP Alerts Specification is now available at:
     
        ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/pmp/wd/wd-mfp-alert-groups10-20061117.doc
        ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/pmp/wd/wd-mfp-alert-groups10-20061117.pdf
        ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/pmp/wd/wd-mfp-alert-groups10-20061117-rev.pdf
     
    This document contains the changes discussed in last Wednesday's
    teleconference.
     
     
        Ron Bergman
        Chairman, PWG PMP Work Group
      

    -- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.7/537 - Release Date: 11/17/2006

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 18 2006 - 12:53:38 EST