Hi,
I got these as personal mail from Anubhav Saxena. Forwarded
for the experts to respond to...
Cheers,
- Ira McDonald
High North Inc
PS - Anubhav - To post to the list, send mail to 'ps@pwg.org'.
-----Original Message-----
From: Anubhav Saxena [mailto:anubhav.saxena@wipro.com]
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 8:11 AM
To: McDonald Ira
Subject: RE: PS> FW: LISA Forum Europe - November 4-7, 2002 in
Heidelberg, Germany
Hi,
I am Anubhav from Wipro, India. I am interested in your specification of PSI
and I am subscribed to the mailing list as well.
I am sorry if I am not supposed to post in message on PSI to you this way,
however I assure you that once I know the protocol, I will stick to it.
Following is my comment on the Requirement Specs of PSI.
After reading the speicification document I see a note on page 17. This is
actually an issue "How does the mobile device know that it can use Model 3
instead of needing use model 2".
I see the following options:
a) Model 2 is one, wherein the mobile device is
1. more capable than in model 3 (hence is probably costlier)
b) Model 2 is one, wherein the print service is
1. capable of handling lesser channels of simultaneous
communications than in model 3
2. for some reason not able to talk to printer
Hence i feel that a mobile will need to take a decision to go in for 2/3
based on
1. Existing protocol support on the mobile itself
2. May be depending of the level of support provided by the print
services
3. Current load on the mobile/print service
However I am not sure about other issues that may be underlying this.
Best Regards,
Anubhav.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 21 2002 - 16:21:27 EDT