Unfortunately, with the shifting of days back and forth I've lost my grip
on this meeting. I won't be able to make it this week. I've got it plugged
in for Wednesday 8/27 and Wednesday's thereafter... as originally
scheduled.
----------------------------------------------
Harry Lewis
Chairman - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
http://www.pwg.org
IBM Printing Systems
http://www.ibm.com/printers
303-924-5337
----------------------------------------------
"Wagner,William" <WWagner@NetSilicon.com>
Sent by: owner-wbmm@pwg.org
08/18/2003 07:58 PM
To
<wbmm@pwg.org>
cc
Subject
WBMM> 21 August WBMM Conference Call
Greetings:
Reminder about this week's WBMM conference call, on Thursday again this
week (but due to return to Wednesday thereafter). I understand that
Harry will set up a WebEX-like capability. However, I suggest that
you pull copies of the documents identified below from the PWG site and
the HP site.
Time:12:00 PM EDT (9:00 AM PDT) Thursday August 21 2003
Call-in US Toll-free: 1-877-874-5524
Call-in International/Toll: 1-712-455-8420
Participant Identification number: 497478
The primary subject is a consideration of the objectives of WBMM (as
represented in the charter, which has been approved) relative to the Web
Services Management Framework (WSMF) that is being developed by HP.
Bob Tailor responded to a query about WSMF versus WBMM as follows:
"HP does believe strongly in the WSMF as a basis for standards for the
management of web services. We do expect management of printers, MFPs and
print services to move in this direction over time."
I would ask that interested participants review the extensive (albeit
somewhat abstract) information on WSMF at
http://devresource.hp.com/drc/specifications/wsmf/index.jsp
This information declares that WSMF is "model neutral", indeed stating
that, "in the future, further examples and white papers will be provided
on how the management information from specific models like MIB/SNMP,
CIM/WBEM, and JMX/JSR77 to WSMF can be achieved." This would suggest that
WBMM efforts on further defining an imaging management model may be
compatible with WSMF, or whatever the framework may evolve into.
Yet, it is unclear that the rest of the framework fully addresses the
scenarios that WBMM has defined, although it seems geared up to address
some much more complicated use cases.
I have also reworked the WBMM "definitions" document and would suggest
this as an outline for a partitioning the WBMM effort. Indeed, depending
upon our take on WSMF, some of the partitions may be covered there and
need not be addressed by the PWG
ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/wbmm/white/definitions2.pdf
The WBMM working group objective is to provide a standard way to address
the uses cases in the WBMM scenario. We intend neither to arbitrarily
fight WSMF nor to passively give way to it. WSMF is, as one would expect,
not imaging specific. On one hand, this is positive in that it may
become an accepted framework upon which a specific imaging model may be
hung. On the other hand, as in past cases, it may hampered by
non-imaging folks simplistic view of what imaging and imaging "object"
management entails. And this relates not only to the management model but
to the operations and delivery.
We would very much appreciate your take on this development, which
illustrates the important of defining a consistent Web Based management
approach, but may wind up evolving into a late and suboptimal solution
for imaging devises and services.
Many thanks
Bill Wagner
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 19 2003 - 01:24:11 EDT