Pete
Ok, but .... people who will start using PJT and not real background
with or using IPP may find it confusing. i.e. "Is it source?" "Is it
tray?" "Is it input tray?" "Are they the same thing?". Does a client
display a label called "Media Source" or "Input Tray" or "Media Tray" or
"Media Input Tray". One more push to use MediaSourceCheck and have a
note stating that new specifications have changed from Input Tray to
Media Source.
[If we change (input) tray to source; does output bin have a new name?]
Glen
________________________________
From: Zehler, Peter [mailto:Peter.Zehler at xerox.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 6:57 AM
To: Petrie, Glen; Michael Sweet
Cc: ipp at pwg.org; mfd at pwg.org
Subject: RE: [IPP] media-input-tray-check-default
Glen,
I want a cleaner mapping to IPP whenever possible. I'd prefer
MediaInputTrayCheck with a clarifying clauses in the descriptions of
MediaSource and MediaInputTrayCheck.
Pete
Peter Zehler
Xerox Research Center Webster
Email: Peter.Zehler at Xerox.com
Voice: (585) 265-8755
FAX: (585) 265-7441
US Mail: Peter Zehler
Xerox Corp.
800 Phillips Rd.
M/S 128-25E
Webster NY, 14580-9701
From: Petrie, Glen [mailto:glen.petrie at eitc.epson.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 8:59 AM
To: Michael Sweet
Cc: Zehler, Peter; ipp at pwg.org; mfd at pwg.org
Subject: RE: [IPP] media-input-tray-check-default
Mike
I am ok with either name; but in PJT, if the convention is to use
MediaSource; then I believe we should use MediaSourceCheck and not
MediaInputTrayCheck.
________________________________
From: Michael Sweet [mailto:msweet at apple.com]
<mailto:%5bmailto:msweet at apple.com%5d>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 3:57 PM
To: Petrie, Glen
Cc: Zehler, Peter; ipp at pwg.org; mfd at pwg.org
Subject: Re: [IPP] media-input-tray-check-default
Glen,
MediaInputTrayCheck and 5100.3's media-input-tray-check use the older
Printer MIB naming convention, even though roll and slot names can be
used.
MediaSource comes from JPS3's media-source - "source" as a more general
word than "input tray" since it covers slots and rolls. We had a lot of
discussion about this early in the definition of media-source for JPS3
and concluded that we should break the chain and use the new name. (oh,
and realizing that we have printer-input-tray and printer-output-tray
mapped from the MIB, I may propose to change those names accordingly for
the final JPS3; "media-source" is widely implemented already but
"printer-input-tray" and "printer-output-tray" are not...)
On Jan 24, 2012, at 2:58 PM, Petrie, Glen wrote:
Pete, Mike
In the PJT the MediaInputTray is (I believe) is called MediaSource; so,
at least in the PJT, should MediaInputTrayCheck become
MediaSourceCheck??
Glen
________________________________
From: ipp-bounces at pwg.org [mailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org]
<mailto:%5bmailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org%5d> On Behalf Of Petrie, Glen
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 2:34 PM
To: Michael Sweet; Zehler, Peter
Cc: ipp at pwg.org
Subject: RE: [IPP] media-input-tray-check-default
Should the value of "Unknown" be used? Below is the statement from
rfc2911
Note: SNMP MIBs use '2' for 'unknown' which corresponds to the IPP
"out-of-band" value 'unknown'. See the description of the "out-of-
band" values at the beginning of Section 4.1. Therefore, attributes
of type 'enum' start at '3'.
________________________________
From: ipp-bounces at pwg.org [mailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org]
<mailto:%5bmailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org%5d> On Behalf Of Michael Sweet
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 8:53 AM
To: Zehler, Peter
Cc: ipp at pwg.org
Subject: Re: [IPP] media-input-tray-check-default
OK, I'm convinced. I'll add "no-value" to this one and any others like
it where it would not always make sense to force a default value.
On Jan 24, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Zehler, Peter wrote:
Mike,
I prefer option #2. One of my reason is that it allows the operator to
set policy for underspecified jobs on the printer. (If the client is
not being careful, then the printer will.) It is a very handy feature
in production printing.
Pete
Peter Zehler
Xerox Research Center Webster
Email: Peter.Zehler at Xerox.com <mailto:Peter.Zehler at Xerox.com>
Voice: (585) 265-8755
FAX: (585) 265-7441
US Mail: Peter Zehler
Xerox Corp.
800 Phillips Rd.
M/S 128-25E
Webster NY, 14580-9701
From: ipp-bounces at pwg.org <mailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org>
[mailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org] <mailto:%5bmailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org%5d>
On Behalf Of Paul Tykodi
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 6:11 AM
To: ipp at pwg.org <mailto:ipp at pwg.org>
Subject: RE: [IPP] media-input-tray-check-default
Hi Mike,
For production printing, I have found during my career that it is
critical to have automatic checks and balances within the job submission
workflow so that a very large job (with a significant cost of
production) is not released such that it will be printed on incorrect
media and thus be a total loss (i.e. must be destroyed and cannot be
distributed - job must be run again). The AFP Consortium has the same
type of intelligence in their Intelligent Printer Data Stream
specification as we have in IPP.
I think it is possible that some vendors may have interpreted the
description in the specification to mean that the default value should
refer to the function being enabled or disabled. If it is enabled, it
then interacts with the media in the job ticket I therefore prefer
option #2 to resolve this issue.
Best Regards,
/Paul
--
Paul Tykodi
Principal Consultant
TCS - Tykodi Consulting Services LLC
Tel/Fax: 603-343-1820
Mobile: 603-866-0712
E-mail: ptykodi at tykodi.com <mailto:ptykodi at tykodi.com>
WWW: http://www.tykodi.com <http://www.tykodi.com/>
From: ipp-bounces at pwg.org <mailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org>
[mailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org] <mailto:%5bmailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org%5d>
On Behalf Of Michael Sweet
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 6:14 PM
To: ipp at pwg.org <mailto:ipp at pwg.org>
Subject: [IPP] media-input-tray-check-default
All,
I am going through yet another round of updates to the IANA registry
(this time for sure! :), and noticed that I still have the
media-input-tray-check-default attribute tagged as "under review". I
would like to resolve this before we submit our next round of updates to
the registry.
BACKGROUND
PWG 5100.3 (Production Printing Set 1) defines the
media-input-tray-check Job Template attribute thusly:
The "media-input-tray-check" Job Template attribute indicates
that the Printer MUST check that the characteristics of the media in the
identified input tray are the same as characteristics of the media
identified by the Job's "media" Job Template attribute or matched (see
section 3.13) by the Job's "media- col" Job Template attribute. The
keyword values are the same input tray keyword values as are defined for
the "media" Job Template attribute (see section 6.3 in this document and
[RFC2911] Appendix C), i.e., 'top', 'middle', 'bottom', etc.
Independent of the "ipp-attributes-fidelity" operation attribute
supplied by the client, if the characteristics differ, the Printer adds
the 'resources-are-not-ready' value (see section 6.1) to the job's
"job-state-reasons" attribute and MAY either (1) put the job into the
'pending-held' state or (2) start to process the job normally, but
immediately stop the job ("job-state" = 'processing-stopped') and the
Printer ("printer-state" = 'stopped'). In either implementation, the
operator can change the media in the input tray to agree with the job or
can modify the job's "media" or "media-col" attributes to agree with the
input tray, depending on policy.
Table 1 (at the beginning of section 3) defines
media-input-tray-check-default and -supported.
The issue is that there should not be a default media-input-tray-check
value; like some other Job Template attributes (e.g. overrides), it does
not make sense to have a default value for this particular attribute
since it interacts with the media in the job ticket.
There are two ways to resolve this issue:
1. Drop media-input-tray-check-default from the registry and post an
errata for 5100.3 removing the media-input-tray-check-default attribute
from Table 1.
2. Update the definition of media-input-tray-check-default to include
the "no-value" out-of-band value.
I prefer option #1.
Comments?
________________________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is
believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is
believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is
believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
ipp mailing list
ipp at pwg.org <mailto:ipp at pwg.org>
https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp
<https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp>
__________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is
believed to be clean.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is
believed to be clean.
__________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20120125/b656f74c/attachment-0001.html>