Hi Mike,
In ITU-T specs, I've seen "protocol elements" used to avoid ultimately vague
words like "items" (which sounds like the stock of a convenience store...).
Cheers,
- Ira
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Co-Chair - TCG Metadata Access Protocol SG
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
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434
On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 4:50 PM Michael Sweet <msweet at apple.com> wrote:
> Ira,
>>> On Mar 7, 2019, at 4:47 PM, Ira McDonald via ipp <ipp at pwg.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> That last may have been a dumb response.
>> But I don't like the term "items". Should we enumerate operations,
> features,
> attributes, and values?
>>> I originally enumerated things (like we do in the IPP registry process
> document), which is "operations, attributes, attribute syntaxes, values,
> and status codes", but that seemed like too much so I opted to shorten
> things to "items" since it covers any usage.
>> _________________________________________________________
> Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer
>>-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20190307/101a7664/attachment.html>