Hi,
Works for me too. Thanks for the cleaned up design requirements
list Mike and Pete.
Cheers,
- Ira
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
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, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Michael Sweet <msweet at apple.com> wrote:
> Works for me.
>> On Sep 17, 2014, at 8:47 AM, Zehler, Peter <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com> wrote:
>> Small edit on number 7. If this is acceptable, I’ll post an update for
> Formal Vote.
>>>> 1. Follow the PWG Semantic Model for the Network Scan Service.
>> 1. Follow the naming conventions defined in IPP/1.1: Model and
> Semantics [RFC2911], including keyword value case (lower) and hyphenation
> requirements
>> 2. Re-use existing IPP operations, attributes, and values when
> possible.
>> 3. Define IPP attributes, values, and operations necessary for Push
> Scan.
>> 4. Define IPP attributes, values, and operations necessary for Pull
> Scan.
>> 5. Define a minimum set of required document formats for
> interoperability.
>> 6. Define security requirements necessary to support privacy,
> integrity, and auditing policies
>> 7. Define sections to register all attributes, values, and operations
> with IANA and PWG Semantic Model
>> 8. Support one or more destinations for Push Scan.
>> 9. Support monitoring of the status of transmission to each
> destination.
>> 10. Support streaming of basic page-based raster data.
>> 11. Support identification of the Imaging Device.
>>>>>> Peter Zehler
>>> PARC, A Xerox Company
> 800 Phillips Rd, 128-27E
> Webster NY, 14580-9701
> Email: Peter.Zehler at Xerox.com> Office: +1 (585) 265-8755
>> Mobile: +1 (585) 329-9508
> FAX: +1 (585) 265-7441
>>>> *From:* Michael Sweet [mailto:msweet at apple.com <msweet at apple.com>]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 17, 2014 7:50 AM
> *To:* Zehler, Peter
> *Cc:* Ira McDonald; Manchala, Daniel; ipp at pwg.org> *Subject:* Re: [IPP] IPP Scan question.
>>>> Pete,
>>>> On Sep 17, 2014, at 7:25 AM, Zehler, Peter <Peter.Zehler at xerox.com> wrote:
>> Daniel,
>>>> I agree with Ira. Section 3.5 are design requirements. Also note that no
> conformance terminology is used in the design requirements. My preference
> would be to leave the specification as currently written.
>>>> If it must be changed, perhaps the “Push Scan and Pull Scan are required”
> could be changed to “Push Scan and Pull Scan must be included in the
> definition”.
>>>> I think some editorial changes to remove conformance-like words would be
> appropriate and useful. In the process we can normalize the text so that is
> reads consistently, e.g.:
>>>> The design requirements for this specification are:
>>>> 1. Follow the PWG Semantic Model for the Network Scan Service.
>> 2. Follow the naming conventions defined in IPP/1.1: Model and
> Semantics [RFC2911], including keyword value case (lower) and hyphenation
> requirements
>> 3. Re-use existing IPP operations, attributes, and values when
> possible.
>> 4. Define IPP attributes, values, and operations necessary for Push
> Scan.
>> 5. Define IPP attributes, values, and operations necessary for Pull
> Scan.
>> 6. Define a minimum set of required document formats for
> interoperability.
>> 7. Define security requirements necessary to support privacy,
> integrity, and auditing policies
>> 8. Define sections to register all attributes, values, and operations
> with IANA
>>>> (not sure if these are "design requirements" or just "functional
> requirements driven by use cases")
>>>> 9. Support one or more destinations for Push Scan.
>> 10. Support monitoring of the status of transmission to each
> destination.
>> 11. Support streaming of basic page-based raster data.
>> 12. Support identification of the Imaging Device.
>>>> Pete
>>>> Peter Zehler
>>> PARC, A Xerox Company
> 800 Phillips Rd, 128-27E
> Webster NY, 14580-9701
> Email: Peter.Zehler at Xerox.com> Office: +1 (585) 265-8755
>> Mobile: +1 (585) 329-9508
> FAX: +1 (585) 265-7441
>>>> *From:* ipp-bounces at pwg.org [mailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org> <ipp-bounces at pwg.org>] *On Behalf Of *Ira McDonald
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 16, 2014 9:16 PM
> *To:* Manchala, Daniel; Ira McDonald
> *Cc:* ipp at pwg.org> *Subject:* Re: [IPP] IPP Scan question.
>>>> Hi Daniel,
>> I'll try to answer this one. Mike and Pete can chime in of course.
>> Section 3.5 Design Requirements simply requires that the *spec*
> defines methods and attributes for both Push and Pull scan - NOT
> that any Printer or Client has to implement them.
>> Sections 8.x are correct that Push Scan is OPTIONAL - this was
> always intended.
>> The old section 11.1 requirement (SHOULD) was redundant and
> removed in the clarification of sections 11.x in general.
>> Does that help?
>> Cheers,
>> - Ira
>>>>> Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
> Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
> Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
> Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
> Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG
> 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 Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 8:41 PM, Manchala, Daniel <
>Daniel.Manchala at xerox.com> wrote:
>> Section 3.5 (Design Requirements) Item 3. says:
>> * Push Scan and Pull Scan are required.
>>>> This statement (...are required...) states that the Push Scan is required.
>>>> However, Section 8.2 Job Template attributes: destination-uris says:
>>>> * Scan Services that support Push Scanning MUST support this attribute.
>>>> This statement (...that support ...) states that the Push Scan is optional.
>>>> Again, Section 8.3.2 destination-uri-schemes-supported says:
>>>> * Scan Services that support Push Scan MUST support this attribute.
>>>> This statement (...that support ...) states that the Push Scan is optional.
>>>> Section 11.1 mentioned "Scan Services MUST support Pull Scan and SHOULD
> support Push Scan" in an older version of the document (20140725), but the
> current version does not mention that.
>>>> Can you clarify this?
>>>> Thanks,
>> Daniel.
>>>>> _______________________________________________
> ipp mailing list
>ipp at pwg.org>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp>>>> _______________________________________________
> ipp mailing list
>ipp at pwg.org>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp>>>> _________________________________________________________
> Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
>>>>> _________________________________________________________
> Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair
>>-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20140917/9c10d8a6/attachment.html>