On Thu, 25 Mar 1999, Zehler, Peter wrote:
> Since the Date field probably is most useful for clients when the server
> is spooling. I would recomend one of this alternatives:
> 1) Add optional attribute that gives the time in an absolute form.
> 2) If the server can answer in an absolute form it should do that
> otherwise it will answer in an relative form as the protocol states
> today.
> PZ> Are you suggesting alternate syntaxes for the same attribute?
> PZ> Are you suggesting the following from the issues list?
> > 1.Add to the IPP/1.1 Model and Semantics document OPTIONAL job
> > description attributes: .date-time-at-creation (dateTime)., .date-
> > time-at-processing (dateTime)., and .date-time-at-completion
> > (dateTime)..
> PZ> It is statement 2 above that confuses me. Are you suggesting
> PZ> the client ask for all attributes or both the absolute and relative
> PZ> attributes or something else?
Alternative 1 is the same as the suggestion 1 from the issue list.
What I meant to suggest in alternative 2 was that you instead of adding
three new optional attributes changes the syntax for the following
attributes to:
time-at-creation (integer(0:MAX) | dateTime)
time-at-processing (integer(0:MAX) | dateTime)
time-at-completion (integer(0:MAX) | dateTime)
/Stefan
--
Stefan Andersson Software Engineer
Print Server Business Unit Stefan.Andersson at axis.com
AXIS Communications AB Phone: +46 46 270 19 85
Scheelevägen 16 Fax: +46 46 13 61 30
S-223 70 LUND, SWEDEN http://www.axis.com