attachment-0001

We touched on this earlier in the year in the context of SM schemas. We backed off when we backed off the design point where devices would hit the server real-time. If we're drifting back in that direction, we'll have to develop our  requirements in terms of bandwidth, QOS, and look for commercial solutions and determine how to fund this via ISTO PWG. I do think it should be feasible to find a commercial solution that meets our needs at an affordable price.   I agree with Don that we can't expect a volunteer member to bear this responsibility! ---------------------------------------------- Harry Lewis IBM Printing Systems ---------------------------------------------- <table width=100%> <tr valign=top> <td> <td>don@lexmark.com Sent by: owner-sm@pwg.org 04/09/2003 02:07 PM <td>                To:        sm@pwg.org, ps@pwg.org         cc:                 Subject:        SM> Dead-on-arrival proposal from "IPP Document Object Spec available for Thursday, April 10, SM Telecon, 10-11 PDT (1-2 EDT)"</table> <tt>In regards to issue 4 and some background preceding it: ---------------- The values of the "document-format" and their corresponding "document-format-version" values will be kept in a flat text file on the PWG server for use by the PWG and CIP4.  Implementers and implementations will be able to access this file at any time (at CD writing time, install time, vendor update time, and/or at power-up time, etc.).  New values will be added to the flat file by its Maintainer after sending to the PWG list for a two week review whenever they are registered with or standardized by some recognized body, such as IANA, CIP4, ISO, etc. ACTION ITEM (Tom): Get CIP4 buy-in to use the same flat file (which will require an additional field for the JDF FileType attribute.  ACTION ITEM (Tom and Ira): Propose a format for the file.  The URL is:  ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/???.txt  ISSUE 04:  What should the URL be for the flat file?  What is the formatting conventions for the flat file.  Is it a PWG Schema of sorts? ---------------- I CANNOT SUPPORT USING THE PWG SERVER BY ANYTHING OTHER THAN HUMAN BEINGS!!!!! Any proposal that endorses or proposes access by machines "at install time" or "at power-up time" is simply not workable unless some other company wants to support what will become multiple machines with giant bandwidth pipes to the internet to support millions of printers and other devices. I suggest you find another solution. ******************************************* 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 and Standards Lexmark International 740 New Circle Rd C14/082-3 Lexington, Ky 40550 859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax) ******************************************* ---------------------- Forwarded by Don Wright/Lex/Lexmark on 04/09/2003 04:01 PM --------------------------- "Hastings, Tom N" <hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com>@pwg.org on 04/09/2003 07:54:04 AM Sent by:    owner-ps@pwg.org To:    sm@pwg.org cc:    ps@pwg.org Subject:    PS> IPP Document Object Spec available for Thursday, April 10,       SM Tel     econ, 10-11 PDT (1-2 EDT) I've finished the editing on the IPP Document Object Spec and have down loaded it to: ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/new_DOC/wd-ippdoc10-20030407.pdf.zip   1353 KB ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/new_DOC/wd-ippdoc10-20030407.doc.zip   326 KB This will be reviewed on Thursday, April 10, SM Telecon, 10-11 PDT (1-2 EDT). Sorry for the short notice, but the editing took way more time than I thought. Version 0.9, 7 April 2003, agreements from the April 3 telecon: 1.   Added "document-charset" (charset), "document-digital-signature" (type2 keyword), "document-format-version" (text(127)), and "document-natural-language" (naturalLanguage) Operation and Document Description attributes and corresponding "xxx-default" and "xxx-supported" Printer Description attributes. 2.   Changed the "document-natural-language" member attribute of "document-format-details" (1setOf collection) operation attribute to be 1setOf, but kept the top level "document-natural-language" Operation attribute as single-valued. 3.   Added Summary Table 2 of new Operation/Document Description attributes. 4.   Defined CONDITIONALLY REQUIRED and CMUST Conformance Terms. 5.   Deleted the "document-id-uri" Operation attribute no longer needed by PSI. 6.   Changed "ipp-attribute-fidelity" so it doesn't affect operation attributes, so it is the same as in [RFC2911]. 7.   Clarified the operation attributes supplied at the Job Level in Print-Job and Print-URI versus Create-Job by introducing the "p" notation in Table 7. 8.   Added columns to  Table 7 to show the corresponding Document Description attributes and the "xxx-default" and "xxx-supported" Printer Description attributes. 9.   Clarified that all of the new Operation attributes are hints, except "document-charset" and "document-format" and that the client can turn them into Must Honor by supplying their keyword attribute names in the "job-mandatory-attributes Operation attribute. 10.  Add the unique lang prefix from the Printer MIB to all "document-format-version" values, so that they can all be in a single flat list for the Printer's "document-format-version-supported" Printer Description attribute. There are four issues embedded in the document and a 5th from Dennis (see below): 6.1.1 document-charset (charset) ISSUE 01:  Since we agreed that this attribute isn't a hint, OK to make it CONDITIONALLY REQUIRED for Printers that support charset-ambiguous document formats? If the Printer supports this "document-digital-signature" Operation attribute and the value supplied by the client, the Printer MUST verify the signature according to the rule for that signature format.  If the signature does not verify, then the Printer MUST either (1) ignore the signature or (2) put the job on hold and wait for human intervention, depending on implementation.  The Printer gives no additional indication to the client. ISSUE 02:  Is either (1) ignore the signature or (2) put the job on hold the correct behavior for the Printer if the digital signature doesn't verify? This Printer behavior is backwards compatible with a Printer that doesn't support the "digital-signature" attribute.  However, if the Printer supports the "job-mandatory-attributes" attribute (see section 8.1.2) and the client supplies the "job-mandatory-attribute" Operation attribute with the 'digital-signature' keyword value, then the Printer MUST reject the job if the "digital-signature" attribute is supplied with a value that isn't supported by the Printer (or the Printer doesn't support the "digital-signature" attribute at all).  Thus the client can force the Printer to reject a signed document for a signature technology that the Printer does not support.  ISSUE 03: What if the digital signature is supported, but the signature fails verification by the Printer when "job-mandatory-attributes" identifies 'document-digital-signature'? The values of the "document-format" and their corresponding "document-format-version" values will be kept in a flat text file on the PWG server for use by the PWG and CIP4.  Implementers and implementations will be able to access this file at any time (at CD writing time, install time, vendor update time, and/or at power-up time, etc.).  New values will be added to the flat file by its Maintainer after sending to the PWG list for a two week review whenever they are registered with or standardized by some recognized body, such as IANA, CIP4, ISO, etc. ACTION ITEM (Tom): Get CIP4 buy-in to use the same flat file (which will require an additional field for the JDF FileType attribute.  ACTION ITEM (Tom and Ira): Propose a format for the file.  The URL is:  ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/???.txt  ISSUE 04:  What should the URL be for the flat file?  What is the formatting conventions for the flat file.  Is it a PWG Schema of sorts? and here is ISSUE 05 from Dennis Carney: - I brought this up on the call, but I'll mention it again, since I'm not sure whether it was resolved.  You sell a printer.  You happen to have found out that some specific thing goes wrong when a user uses Powerpoint 2000 on Windows NT 4.0, such that your printer always messes up the printout.  How do you specify this in document-format-details-implemented? And a much simpler issue on these same lines: why would *anyone*, ever, return any values for the document-creator-application-name-implemented or document-creator-application-version-implemented member attributes--why would anyone want to try to list all applications they support?  Similarly for the two "os" member attributes--I might know I don't provide special drivers for Macintosh, but anyone using an LPR utility on Macintosh, with a PDF file, *can* print to me from Macintosh.  Even if there *were* some OSes I wanted to say I don't support (which seems doubtful), I have to do this by listing all *other* OSes?  I guess in summary: I can see the use for the 5th-8th member attributes of document-format-details-implemented, but not for the 1st-4th. Tom </tt>