Jay,
Go ahead and edit the .doc file.
I just posted the updates that we agreed to at the meeting with
revision marks turned on:
-rw-r--r-- 1 pwg pwg 33792 Jul 6 21:56 lpd-ipp.doc
-rw-r--r-- 1 pwg pwg 24631 Jul 6 21:54 lpd-ipp.pdf
-rw-r--r-- 1 pwg pwg 16181 Jul 6 21:55 lpd-ipp.txt
so you should start with that version. First accept all revisions
before editing. Also please make sure that revision marks are turned on while
you edit.
I'm curious about all your changes though, since I think we agreed that the
purpose of the document is to relate what is said in 1179 to IPP, rather than
to relate what is actual practice to IPP. I did take Bob Herriot's
suggestion to put into an appendix the few most flagrant differences between
1179 and current practice.
As far as Carl-Uno's concern about producing .txt for the IETF, I've also posted
the .txt file that I can automatically (well all-mosot) from the .doc file,
so don't worry about that. The .txt file that I posted has a few 79-character
lines that I'll fix before we publish to not exceed 72 characters.
I've added you and Bob as authors already.
Tom
At 13:23 07/05/97 PDT, JK Martin wrote:
>Tom,
>>I've started going thru your mapping document but find I have so many
>comments and suggestions that it would be best for me to post a new
>version (using your .doc file as the starting point).
>>Does anyone have any objections to my posting a new version with my
>comments? (This is essentially the approach Patrick Powell used when
>he posted his comments on the IPP Model document.)
>> ...jay
>>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>-- JK Martin | Email: jkm at underscore.com --
>-- Underscore, Inc. | Voice: (603) 889-7000 --
>-- 41C Sagamore Park Road | Fax: (603) 889-2699 --
>-- Hudson, NH 03051-4915 | Web: http://www.underscore.com --
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>