During the IPP phone conference on 970305 we established that there are
still significant differences between what is in the Requirements vs. the
Model & Semantics documents. There also seems to still be devided opinions
about some of the requirements.
Please take out some time to carefully review the Requirements document and
give your views about the following subjects:
1) Are there requirements that in your view do not belong in this document
at all (because they are not really user requirements, but expected design
features)?
2) Are there requirements in there that should be clearly marked as either
not part of the actual IPP protocol at all, or that should be marked for
future versions beyond IPP Verwsion 1.0?
3) Are there requirements that you generally has a disagreement on and
would like to express differently?
4) Are there inconsistencies between the scenario part and the remaining
text part of the Requirements document?
5) Are there editorial or terminology problems that you would want to have
corrected?
Comments and text proposals are due by Tuesday March 11, so that we can
discuss any new input in our IPP phone conference on Wednesday, March 12.
We need you all to help out doing the quality check!
Regards,
Carl-Uno
Carl-Uno Manros
Principal Engineer - Advanced Printing Standards - Xerox Corporation
701 S. Aviation Blvd., El Segundo, CA, M/S: ESAE-231
Phone +1-310-333 8273, Fax +1-310-333 5514
Email: manros at cp10.es.xerox.com