C.htm

<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"> <style>  </style>  </head> <body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple> <div class=Section1> All,<o:p></o:p>  Some comments and questions.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <![if !supportLists]>1.       <![endif]>It is common usage that a Job is submitted to the Service. This is in Abstract to the Resource Service  and at various places in the text. I have used the expression extensively in working on the General document. But in the model that is being defined, the user/client submits a CreateJob request, and perhaps he submits a document, but the Service creates the job. At least that is my understanding. Since this aspect of the model is different from common usage, I suggest we avoid the terminology of “submitting a job” in that it would reinforce a concept contrary to the Model.<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>2.       <![endif]>I have trouble with saying that the Resource Service is accepting Jobs (para 6.5.10.2.1 et al). From my understanding of the overall model, it does not accept, create or deal with jobs. It accepts and provides information about accepted resources to a user/client. It provides resources to other Services. Should this be “is accepting  and supplying resources”<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>3.       <![endif]>If we agree in general that  paths to and from Testing are implementation dependent, I suggest that the “test” operation be removed and perhaps that the Testing state be removed from 6.5.10.2.1 and 6.5.10.2.2<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>4.       <![endif]>The sole purpose is to provide resources to other services.  Yet are we considering the Resource Service to be completely independent and separate from  the Job Processing services? <o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>a.       <![endif]>Are the basic service operations described in Section 7.1 the  inter-service operations as well setup and configuration operations with a Client/User?<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>b.      <![endif]> Is there but one access path, so that in the Idle State, it is handling neither client or Service requests? And in the Processing state, it is handling requests from a either client or another Service?<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>c.       <![endif]>When it is Down and offline with respect to clients, is it also offline with respect  to responding to other services, perhaps in the same device?<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>5.       <![endif]>SetResourceElements (7.1.11) and all of the Administrative  Resource Service Operations  (7.2) are not indicated as Required or Optional.<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>6.       <![endif]>In the compliance section (8), requirements are placed on clients and Resource Service.  If the operations listed also apply to the supported Services, are these Services also Resource Service clients? If so, I suggest that it is not reasonable to require them to support all of the “required” operations.<o:p></o:p> Thanks,<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> Bill Wagner<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'> From: owner-mfd@pwg.org [mailto:owner-mfd@pwg.org] On Behalf Of nchen@okidata.com Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 12:50 PM To: mfd@pwg.org; owner-mfd@pwg.org Subject: Re: MFD> MFD Teleconference, Thursday 1/29 3:00 EDT<o:p></o:p> </div> <o:p> </o:p> All, This is a reminder. As Pete announced, we will review the last updated Resource Service draft in the teleconference next Thursday to conclude our WG Last Call and move to PWG Last Call version after the update from the teleconference next Thursday. I urge you all review the draft at: <tt><ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/mfd/wd/wd-mfdresourcemodel10-20090115.pdf</tt> and send your comments to mfd@pwg.org and cc me (nchen@okidata.com) or pete(Peter.Zehler@xerox.com). We will resolve all your comments in next Thursday's teleconference and prepare the Resouce Service spec for the PWG Last Call to start afterwards. Thanks for your participation. -Nancy <o:p></o:p> <table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellpadding=0 width="100%" style='width:100.0%'> <tr> <td width="40%" valign=top style='width:40.0%;padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> "Zehler, Peter" <Peter.Zehler@xerox.com> Sent by: owner-mfd@pwg.org <o:p></o:p> 01/22/2009 12:06 PM <o:p></o:p> </td> <td width="59%" valign=top style='width:59.0%;padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> <table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellpadding=0 width="100%" style='width:100.0%'> <tr> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> To<o:p></o:p> </td> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> <mfd@pwg.org> <o:p></o:p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> cc<o:p></o:p> </td> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'></td> </tr> <tr> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> Subject<o:p></o:p> </td> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'> MFD> MFD Teleconference, Thursday 1/29 3:00 EDT<o:p></o:p> </td> </tr> </table> <o:p> </o:p> <table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellpadding=0> <tr> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'></td> <td valign=top style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'></td> </tr> </table> </td> </tr> </table> <tt>There will be an MFD conference call at 3:00 PM EDT (12:00 PM PDT) this</tt> <tt>Thursday.  The meeting is held in accord with the PWG Intellectual</tt> <tt>Property Policy.</tt> <tt>Note the NEW Teleconference number and access code are now used.</tt> <tt>Please contact me if you do not have the new number and pass code.</tt> <tt>Agenda:</tt> <tt>1. Identify Minute Taker</tt> <tt>2. Approval of minutes from last teleconference</tt> <tt><ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/mfd/minutes/pwg-mfd-minutes-20090115.pdf></tt> <tt>3. Agenda bashing</tt> <tt>4. Discussion on Scan Service State and proposed change to section 10 of</tt> <tt>the specification</tt> <tt>a) Chose between the existing text, proposed text or arrive at</tt> <tt>some other consensus.</tt> <tt>Existing text is section 10</tt> <tt><ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/mfd/wd/lcrc-mfdscanmodel10-20090122.pdf></tt> <tt>Proposed change is available at</tt> <tt><ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/mfd/white/ScanServiceTheoryOfOp.pdf></tt> <tt>b) Discussion of Testing State, transition in and out, and method</tt> <tt>of transition</tt> <tt>5. Discuss syntax of JobPhoneNumber on line 2182 of Scan specification</tt> <tt>6. Discuss open ended REQUIREMENT governed by a third party (End User)</tt> <tt>policy on line 2788-2790 of Scan specification</tt> <tt>7. Discuss any comments on the Resource Service interim draft.</tt> <tt>Objective is to move to the Last Call version for review at the Face to</tt> <tt>Face.</tt> <tt><ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/mfd/wd/wd-mfdresourcemodel10-20090115.pdf></tt> <tt>8. Next steps</tt> <tt>Click Here to Join Live Meeting</tt> <tt><https://www.livemeeting.com/cc/xerox/join?id=PWG_MFD&role=attend&pw=PQ%</tt> <tt>25%3EFj5sN></tt> <tt>Peter Zehler</tt> <tt>Xerox Research Center Webster</tt> <tt>Email: Peter.Zehler@Xerox.com</tt> <tt>Voice: (585) 265-8755</tt> <tt>FAX: (585) 265-7441</tt> <tt>US Mail: Peter Zehler</tt> <tt>Xerox Corp.</tt> <tt>800 Phillips Rd.</tt> <tt>M/S 128-25E</tt> <tt>Webster NY, 14580-9701</tt> <o:p></o:p> </div> </body> </html>