From: Harry Lewis (harryl@us.ibm.com)
Date: Tue Nov 15 2005 - 18:13:49 EST
Questions have been raised as to whether we have consensus to
a) Align the CIM printing model with the PWG Semantic Model, as it evolves
(even if our main goal from a WIMS perspective is...)
b) Ultimate adoption of the PWG common Semantic Model for printing into
WSDM and/or WS-management.
I advocate that both are valid goals... (a) more so from an overall PWG
perspective of evangelizing a common semantic model wherever we find a
receptive party... (b) in pursuit of what appear to be the most likely
emerging contemporary management protocols.
We are coming to the realization that a path through CIM may not be the
most expeditious in terms of WS* support. If these do eventually split
into two efforts, we at least want to keep them highly correlated.
There is the work load issue. I advocate that we assert our direction with
CIM relative to the Work Register to deliver an ?Editorial/Technical"
Change Request addressing description issues, adding new elements and
deprecating wrong elements (possibly... after confirmation from Steve
Jerman). We should stick to changes which are useful and non-contentious
as much as possible. We will acknowledge that we will not achieve a
complete remodeling of CIM for printers. This equates to what would be a
combination of "work product 1 and 2" as described in recent minutes.
After completing this, we should be in a position to know whether a
complete imaging model, including our recently standardized counters,
would best fit into another revision of CIM or as a separate effort direct
with WSDM (for example).
----------------------------------------------
Harry Lewis
IBM STSM
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 2.1.4 : Tue Nov 15 2005 - 18:13:36 EST