PWG Mail Archive: RE: PWG> Process

RE: PWG> Process

From: don@lexmark.com
Date: Wed Jun 04 2003 - 15:44:06 EDT

  • Next message: McDonald, Ira: "RE: PWG> Process"

    Ira:

    I used the word "roughly" with intent.

    The PWG should decide whether PWG Standard is "roughly" equivalent to IETF
    Draft Standard or to IETF Internet Standard.

    Looking at the requirements, I believe IETF Draft Standard is the
    equivalent of PWG Standard.

    **********************************************
     Don Wright don@lexmark.com

     Chair, IEEE SA Standards Board
     Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors
     f.wright@ieee.org / f.wright@computer.org

     Director, Alliances & Standards
     Lexmark International
     740 New Circle Rd
     Lexington, Ky 40550
     859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax)
    **********************************************

    "McDonald, Ira" <imcdonald@sharplabs.com> on 06/04/2003 03:38:09 PM

    To: "'don@lexmark.com'" <don@lexmark.com>, Harry Lewis
           <harryl@us.ibm.com>
    cc: pwg@pwg.org, thrasher@lexmark.com
    Subject: RE: PWG> Process

    Hi Don,

    All very good comments. I agree with all of your proposed additions
    and wording changes.

    I'm curious about your comment (18) below. It makes sense (on one
    level), but would mean that until IETF IPP/1.1 (RFC 2910/2911) moves
    to Internet Standard status (after going from current Proposed
    Standard status to future Draft Standard status), no PWG IPP spec
    could ever move higher than PWG Candidate Standard. Right?

    Is this desirable, given that the IETF IPP WG is moribund and will
    presumably close permanently in the not too distant future?

    Cheers,
    - Ira McDonald
      High North Inc

    -----Original Message-----
    From: don@lexmark.com [mailto:don@lexmark.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 12:10 PM
    To: Harry Lewis
    Cc: pwg@pwg.org; thrasher@lexmark.com
    Subject: Re: PWG> Process

    <...snip...>

    18) Clause 4.7, Page 10, line 355: add "PWG extensions to non-PWG standards
    cannot attain PWG Standard status until the base standard has attained the
    rough equivalent of PWG Standard status in the other organization."

    <...snip...>

    **********************************************
     Don Wright don@lexmark.com

     Chair, IEEE SA Standards Board
     Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors
     f.wright@ieee.org / f.wright@computer.org

     Director, Alliances & Standards
     Lexmark International
     740 New Circle Rd
     Lexington, Ky 40550
     859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax)
    **********************************************

    Harry Lewis <harryl@us.ibm.com>@pwg.org on 05/21/2003 07:04:12 PM

    Sent by: owner-pwg@pwg.org

    To: pwg@pwg.org
    cc:
    Subject: PWG> Process

    There is really no last call process for the process document ;-). Please
    review and prepare to try and close this formally at the Portland plenary.
    If you can't make Portland please share you comments ahead of time so they
    may be incorporated.
    ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/general/process/pwg-process20-20030414.pdf
    ----------------------------------------------
    Harry Lewis
    Chairman - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
    http://www.pwg.org
    IBM Printing Systems
    http://www.ibm.com/printers
     303-924-5337
    ----------------------------------------------



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 04 2003 - 16:37:03 EDT