attachment

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 ----------------------------------------------