Jay wrote:
>>> JK Martin <jkm at underscore.com> 03/20/97 03:08am >>>
> However, if the model then implies that "Printer" is not really a
> one-to-one association with a physical printer, we are going to run
> into some complexities when we (eventually) try to design
> management capabilities.
>> That is, if a management-oriented app wants to use IPP as a way to
> determine the set of printers that may be managed, how does the app
> discover the actual physical printers associated with a Printer?
There are new attributes that could be added the the model (added
to a printer object) in order to show this relationship. We do have
the notion of an "output-device-assigned" Printer attribute
now (which I don't think that we should have by the way), but we
don't have "associated-output-devices". We could
fairly easily add it, but I don't want to confuse issues more than
they are right now. We have some problems in the REQ to MOD to
PRO document path defining what is in scope and what is not
for v1.0, we don't need to make it worse. HOWEVER, we have done
enough talking about it that I personally feel that we have some
ideas on how to extend these objects so that we can do more later.
The model could be expanded right now in order to include this information and these
relationships, however it is not needed right now.
We have enough complexities as it its.
Scott