Tom Hastings said:
>>Our current Model text gives upper bounds on the lengths of the 'text' and
>'name' attributes as 4095 and 255 octets, respectively. However, we don't
>say how many of those octets a Printer object SHALL store. We also don't
>say what happens if a client supplies a value that is longer than
>the maximum size that a Printer supports.
>>These are two issues that will affect interoperability.
>>I suggest that we add two sentences something like:
>>A Printer object SHALL support at least nnn octets in requests and
responses.
>If a client supplies a value that exceeds nnn, the Printer object SHALL
>truncate the value on the right after the nnn-th octet.
>>I propose that 'nnn' be 255 for text and 127 for names. UTF-8 takes about
>1.7 octets per character on average for Western European names.
>>Comments? Lets discuss at Wednesdays telecon.
IMHO, people who read what we have and don't design to what you have
explicitly
required deserve the wrath of the users they will surely get. I can't see
wasting the
toner for two more paragraphs of SHALLs for something that is intuitively
obvious. I'm not going to waste my time but I suspect if I looked, I could
find 1000 other places where we have not defined every word of the Emglish
language.
Don
**********************************************
* Don Wright don at lexmark.com *
* Manager, Strategic Alliances and Standards *
* Lexmark International *
* 740 New Circle Rd *
* Lexington, Ky 40550 *
* 606-232-4808 (phone) 606-232-6740 (fax) *
**********************************************