Hi Mike,
Or "Add<service>ScannedDocument"? "Hardcopy" is causing some
confusion, it seems.
Cheers,
- Ira
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG IPP WG
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - TCG Embedded Systems Hardcopy SG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music/High North Inc
http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusichttp://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com
Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094
Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Michael Sweet <msweet at msweet.org> wrote:
> Ira,
>> IIRC, all of the SM operations use <service> in their names, currently
> Add<service>HardcopyDocument, Send<service>Document, and Send<service>Uri.
>> Using Add<service>ScanDocument might get confusing.
> Add<service>DocumentFromScanner? Or Send<service>DocumentFromScanner to
> retain consistency with the other Send operations?
>>> On 2013-08-07, at 11:32 AM, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Paul,
>> No - I object to AddHardcopyDocument. The only NEW kind of document
> (other than w/ data by value or w/ data by reference) is a scanned
> document.
> No other service would ever be infixed in your proposal.
>> I much prefer AddScanDocument as parallel to [Add/Send]Document.
>> Cheers,
> - Ira
>>> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
> Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
> Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
> Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG IPP WG
> Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
> Chair - TCG Embedded Systems Hardcopy SG
> IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
> Blue Roof Music/High North Inc
>http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic>http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc> mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com> Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094
> Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434
>>>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Paul Tykodi <ptykodi at tykodi.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Ira,****
>>>> ** **
>>>> Following your logic, should we consider maintaining AddHardcopyDocument
>> as the top level in the SM tree and then expand the model with
>> Add<RelevantPWGDefinedService>Document at the next level in the model for
>> each service that can support hardcopy document input?****
>>>> ** **
>>>> 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>> WWW: http://www.tykodi.com****>>>> *From:* mfd-bounces at pwg.org [mailto:mfd-bounces at pwg.org] *On Behalf Of *Ira
>> McDonald
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 07, 2013 11:16 AM
>> *To:* Zehler, Peter; Ira McDonald
>> *Cc:* IPP at pwg.org; mfd at pwg.org; Michael Sweet
>> *Subject:* Re: [MFD] [IPP] Don't redefine Hardcopy Document****
>>>> ** **
>>>> Hi,****
>>>> Which I think implies that I'd like to rename AddHardcopyDocument to****
>>>> AddScanDocument.****
>>>> Cheers,****
>>>> - Ira****
>>>>>> ****
>>>> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
>> Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
>> Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
>> Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG IPP WG
>> Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
>> Chair - TCG Embedded Systems Hardcopy SG
>> IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
>> Blue Roof Music/High North Inc
>>http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic>>http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc>> mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com>> Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094
>> Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434****
>>>> ** **
>>>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com>
>> wrote:****
>>>> Hi,****
>>>> At the risk of adding confusion...
>>>> We speak of submitting Jobs with document data by reference (URI)
>> or by value (attached). ****
>>>>>> Why not just add "by scan (local scanner)".****
>>>> What I don't like about the term "Hardcopy Document Object" is that
>> the word Scan or Scanner isn't there, but this is always the source.****
>>>> Cheers,****
>>>> - Ira****
>>>> PS - I dislike putting titlecase prefixes on Document Object or Job****
>>>> Object - it muddies readability.
>>>> ****
>>>>>> ****
>>>> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
>> Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
>> Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
>> Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG IPP WG
>> Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
>> Chair - TCG Embedded Systems Hardcopy SG
>> IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
>> Blue Roof Music/High North Inc
>>http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic>>http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc>> mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com>> Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094
>> Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434****
>>>> ** **
>>>> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Zehler, Peter <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com>
>> wrote:****
>>>> Mike,****
>>>> Well, I guess I’ll be quiet now except to say it would be a good time to
>> describe the attributes and constraints on all three types of Documents.
>> J****
>>>> 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:* Michael Sweet [mailto:msweet at msweet.org]
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 06, 2013 10:14 PM****
>>>>>> *To:* Zehler, Peter
>> *Cc:* IPP at pwg.org; mfd at pwg.org>> *Subject:* Re: [IPP] Don't redefine Hardcopy Document****
>>>> ****
>>>> Pete,****
>>>> ****
>>>> I guess we are in violent agreement. One comment below.****
>>>> ****
>>>> On 2013-08-06, at 12:54 PM, "Zehler, Peter" <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com>
>> wrote:****
>>>> ..****
>>>> This is the difference between a Hardcopy Document and a Hardcopy
>> Document /Object/. We need to define the latter and not the former.****
>>>> <PZ>I see no subclasses of Documents in the PWG Semantic Model or IPP.
>> Whether a document is added to a Job by value, by reference, or by
>> reference to the output of the scanner subunit, it is still just a Document
>> object. ****
>>>> ****
>>>> I am not suggesting a subclass of document.****
>>>> ****
>>>> We already categorize documents as "referenced" and "with attached
>> document data". For hardcopy documents we would have a Document Object
>> containing description attributes/elements that identify the source and
>> properties of the hardcopy document.****
>>>> ****
>>>> I chose to call it a "Hardcopy Document Object" as opposed to a "Document
>> Object with Associated Hardcopy Document Input Elements". How the digital
>> representation is stored and when exactly the document is scanned are,
>> IMHO, implementation specific.****
>>>> ****
>>>> _____________
>> Michael Sweet****
>>>> ****
>>>> ** **
>>>> _______________________________________________
>> ipp mailing list
>>ipp at pwg.org>>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp****>>>> ** **
>>>> ** **
>>>>> _____________
> Michael Sweet
>>-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20130807/58c17b40/attachment.html>