Glen,
I suggest that saying that the interface was already defined was more an
indication that we have an approach, not that it is done. We indeed talked
about operations/objects that need to be define, such as the query and
response for work objects. Ira had taken a cut at some of the new operations
some time ago, but I think they certainly are subject to review and
additional documentation, if indeed we agree that they are necessary and
sufficient.
I believe we also agreed to specify the client-cloudprintservice interface,
which we also think we have a handle on, but somehow writing it down
explicitly tends to being up other issues.
And, with regard to the “out of scope” registration/association processes, I
believe that even though we may not define these interfaces in terms of
specific operations and sequences, we do need to define them in terms of the
information needs to be exchanged. The situation, as I understand it, is
that Cloud Printing may very well be a service of some other cloud system,
in which case, registration/association/authentication for Cloud Printing
may very well be tied into the registration/association/authentication
processes that are inherent in this wider scope cloud capability. For
example, cloud printing capability may reasonably be supplied in conjunction
with cloud computing facilities, and would use
registration/association/authentication processes already in place for those
facilities (hopefully enhanced by the printing specific information that we
identify).
We would not want to specify processes that are incompatible with such cloud
printing capabilities. However, if the working group determines that we
should also model an independent cloud printing only capability, we could
decide to specify these other interfaces for use in that case. That is up to
the working group to decide.
But for now, let’s try and document what we think we have a good handle on.
Believe me, there really is a lot more work left here than you seem to
suggest.
Thanks,
Bill Wagner
From: Petrie, Glen [mailto:glen.petrie at eitc.epson.com]
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 5:50 PM
To: cloud at pwg.org; William Wagner
Subject: RE: [Cloud] What we are working on
I just saw from Mike Sweet's mail note to Randy, that what I stated below is
mostly (if not completely) true.
Glen
_____
From: <mailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org> cloud-bounces at pwg.org [
<mailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org> mailto:cloud-bounces at pwg.org] On Behalf Of
Petrie, Glen
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 2:41 PM
To: <mailto:cloud at pwg.org> cloud at pwg.org; William Wagner
Subject: [Cloud] What we are working on
Bill,
>From the meeting I understand the "client ó cloud print service" interface
is already defined (according the Pete and Ira). Since other "cloud
system" interfaces (registration, etc) were declared out-of-scope (at least
for now); then I believe this, as I stated in the meeting, leave the group
activity to writing the specification (or augmenting existing specifications
via extensions) for the interface between the "Print Cloud Service ó Cloud
Print Manager". Are there others specification that I missed?
Glen
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by <http://www.mailscanner.info/> MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/cloud/attachments/20120626/c6a70dec/attachment-0002.html>