attachment-0001
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1141" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=146451300-20032003>Harry
and Dennis,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=146451300-20032003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=146451300-20032003>I
agree that -actuals should get a number right now, since it just passed Last
Call to be a Candidate/Proposed standard. The next number in the IPP
serices is 5100.5.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=146451300-20032003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=146451300-20032003>I
assume that we can ignore the initial drafts of other IPP extension documents
that I posted last summer with numbers on them (but not in the file name).
I think that they have all had more recent Working Drafts with the numbers
removed too.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=146451300-20032003></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=146451300-20032003>Tom</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Harry Lewis
[mailto:harryl@us.ibm.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, March 14, 2003
20:44<BR><B>To:</B> Hastings, Tom N<BR><B>Cc:</B> pwg@pwg.org; Dennis
Carney<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: IFX> RE: PWG> PWG IEEE-ISTO number for
Proposed XHTML/Print standard [ and future PDF/is
standard]<BR><BR></FONT></DIV><BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=2>What about the
-actuals which just passed last call and formal approval? Seems if everybody
is getting a number, this should too.</FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif
size=2>---------------------------------------------- <BR>Harry Lewis <BR>IBM
Printing Systems <BR>----------------------------------------------
</FONT><BR><BR><BR>
<TABLE width="100%">
<TBODY>
<TR vAlign=top>
<TD>
<TD><FONT face=sans-serif size=1><B>"Hastings, Tom N"
<hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com></B></FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif
size=1>Sent by: owner-ifx@pwg.org</FONT>
<P><FONT face=sans-serif size=1>03/14/2003 05:55 PM</FONT> </P>
<TD><FONT face=Arial size=1> </FONT><BR><FONT
face=sans-serif size=1> To:
pwg@pwg.org</FONT> <BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=1>
cc: ifx@pwg.org</FONT>
<BR><FONT face=sans-serif size=1> Subject:
IFX> RE: PWG> PWG IEEE-ISTO number for
Proposed XHTML/Print standard [ and future
PDF/is standard]</FONT></TR></TBODY></TABLE><BR><BR><BR><FONT size=2><TT>So
Don is suggesting that the PDF/is standard which is also a document<BR>format
standard could be also numbered in the 5102 series along with the
two<BR>XHTML/Print document format standards (5102.1 and 5102.2) when we
assign a<BR>PWG IEEE-ISTO number to
PDF/is.<BR><BR>Comments?<BR><BR>Tom<BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From:
don@lexmark.com [mailto:don@lexmark.com]<BR>Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003
06:02<BR>To: Hastings, Tom N<BR>Cc: Lewis, Harry<BR>Subject: RE: PWG> PWG
IEEE-ISTO number for Proposed XHTML/Print
standard<BR><BR><BR><BR>Tom:<BR><BR>The documents (and their full titles) are
available
from<BR><BR>http://www.pwg.org/xhtml-print/HTML-Version/XHTML-Print.html<BR>http://www.pwg.org/xhtml-print/HTML-Version/CSS-Print.html<BR><BR>I
think making the 5102 series be document formats makes
sense.<BR><BR>**********************************************<BR>Don Wright
don@lexmark.com<BR><BR>Chair, IEEE SA Standards Board<BR>Member,
IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors<BR>f.wright@ieee.org /
f.wright@computer.org<BR><BR>Director, Alliances & Standards<BR>Lexmark
International<BR>740 New Circle Rd<BR>Lexington, Ky 40550<BR>859-825-4808
(phone) 603-963-8352
(fax)<BR>**********************************************<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>"Hastings,
Tom N" <hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com> on 03/13/2003 05:28:42 PM<BR><BR>To:
don@lexmark.com<BR>cc: "Lewis, Harry"
<harryl@us.ibm.com>, "Hastings, Tom N"<BR>
<hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com><BR>Subject: RE: PWG> PWG
IEEE-ISTO number for Proposed XHTML/Print standard<BR><BR><BR>Don,<BR><BR>That
is what I remembered, so 5102.1 and 5102.2 sound OK?<BR><BR>What are the full
titles of each?<BR><BR>We (or your WG) can decide later whether the 5102
series is for any PWG<BR>document format, such as PDF/is, or just for
XHTML-like stuff or just for<BR>XML-related document formats or whatever,
right?<BR><BR>Tom<BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: don@lexmark.com
[mailto:don@lexmark.com]<BR>Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 12:58<BR>To:
Hastings, Tom N<BR>Cc: Lewis, Harry<BR>Subject: Re: PWG> PWG IEEE-ISTO
number for Proposed XHTML/Print standard<BR><BR><BR><BR>Just a reminder that
the XHTML-Print group has TWO documents at Proposed<BR>Standard Status so we
need two numbers.<BR><BR>**********************************************<BR>Don
Wright
don@lexmark.com<BR><BR>Chair, IEEE SA Standards Board<BR>Member,
IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors<BR>f.wright@ieee.org /
f.wright@computer.org<BR><BR>Director, Alliances & Standards<BR>Lexmark
International<BR>740 New Circle Rd<BR>Lexington, Ky 40550<BR>859-825-4808
(phone) 603-963-8352
(fax)<BR>**********************************************<BR><BR><BR><BR>"Hastings,
Tom N" <hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com>@pwg.org on 03/13/2003<BR>03:22:42
PM<BR><BR>Sent by: owner-pwg@pwg.org<BR><BR><BR>To:
"Lewis, Harry" <harryl@us.ibm.com><BR>cc:
pwg@pwg.org<BR>Subject: PWG> PWG IEEE-ISTO number
for Proposed XHTML/Print standard<BR><BR><BR>Harry,<BR><BR>Per the discussion
today at the SM telecon on PWG process about standards<BR>numbers and what to
do about allocating a PWG number for the Proposed PWG<BR>XHTML/Print standard
as requested by Don for the W3C.<BR><BR>In order to give Don a PWG number for
the XHTML/Print Proposed PWG<BR>Standard,<BR>the next series of numbers not
yet used is 5102.n.<BR><BR>Currently, Proposed PWG standards have the
following numbers:<BR><BR>5100.1, 5100.2, 5100.3, 5100.4 ... for
IPP<BR><BR>5101.1 for the Media Standardized Names<BR><BR>So how about 5102.1
for XHTML/Print. If there are several documents,<BR>5102.1<BR>and
5102.2<BR><BR><BR>ISSUE: How to number future standards? We can
decide later how to<BR>allocate<BR>numbers for:<BR><BR>PWG Semantic
Model<BR>Print Services Interface<BR>IPPFAX<BR>PDF/is<BR>etc.<BR><BR>Is the
5102 series for document formats, so that PDF/is would go in
that<BR>series?<BR><BR>Should IPPFAX go in its own series, or should it be in
the IPP 5100.n<BR>series?<BR><BR>Should PWG Semantic Model be in its own
series?<BR><BR>Should PSI be in its own series?<BR><BR>Or is there some common
theme that would help put some of these in the
same<BR>series.<BR><BR><BR>ISSUE: Separate isssue is what happens when
the Proposed/Candidate<BR>Standard<BR>reaches Standard?<BR><BR>Does it get a
new number or use the same number? If a new number could it<BR>be some
algorithm from its original number, such as adding 50. So
5150.2<BR>would be the Standard version of Proposed standard
5100.2.<BR><BR>Tom<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR></TT></FONT><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>