Chris,
These are great comments - can you re-send to the PWG Last Call addresses so we can count this towards quorum?
From the last call announcement that went to the pwg-announce list:
> HOW TO RESPOND
>> Send an email with *exactly* the following subject line format:
>> Subject: <Company Name> has reviewed IPP Enterprise Printing Extensions v2.0 (EPX) and has [no] comments
>>> WHERE TO SEND YOUR RESPONSE
>> Please DO NOT simply reply to this note on the PWG-Announce list.
>> Please send your response to *all* of the following email addresses:
>> blueroofmusic at gmail.com (Ira McDonald, IPP Workgroup Co-Chair)
> ptykodi at tykodi.com (Paul Tykodi, IPP Workgroup Co-Chair)
> msweet at lakesiderobotics.ca (Michael Sweet, IPP Workgroup Secretary)
> smith.kennedy at hp.com (Smith Kennedy, Document Editor)
Thank you!
> On Jan 4, 2024, at 1:23 PM, Rizzo, Christopher via ipp <ipp at pwg.org> wrote:
>> Some comments/questions:
> Use case figures mention “Job ticket”. I presume “Job ticket” refers to a initial value/default job object that is used to create all jobs with defaults? Is there a spec where this concept is defined? Should there be a reference to that here? It appears that job ticket is an abstract (or phantom) object (ie – an object that does not really exist until a concrete operation is received) and gets updated based user authentication state?
> Section 3.2.8 Description paragraph seems to imply Duncan has permission to print in color, yet Figure 3 shows Duncan does not have permission. Is there a different between Duncan’s “office user account” and his “personal account” – is this why Figure 3 shows he cannot print in color – I cannot tell if there are 2 different accounts in play here.
> Section 4.2.1 Job Proof and Suspend 2nd paragraph line 629-630 – Error! Reference source not found
> Section 6.1.1 – Line 815-816 - Is it possible a printer that can support Job Release but not support job-release-action = job-password? These lines seem to imply job-password is always required when Job Release (Action) is supported. But I’m not seeing this requirement in the 10.1.1 Printer Conformance section.
> Chris
> Christopher Rizzo
> Engineer II, Software Engineering
> Design & Development Engineering
> <image001.png> Xerox Corporation
> Virtual Office Employee
> 26600 SW Parkway Ave
> Wilsonville, OR 97070
> <image002.png> <image003.png> <image004.png> <image005.png> <image006.png> From: ipp <ipp-bounces at pwg.org> on behalf of PWG Workgroup <ipp at pwg.org>
> Reply-To: PWG Workgroup <ipp at pwg.org>
> Date: Tuesday, January 2, 2024 at 9:31 AM
> To: PWG Workgroup <ipp at pwg.org>
> Cc: "Kennedy, Smith (Wireless & IPP Standards)" <smith.kennedy at hp.com>
> Subject: [IPP] Updated draft of IPP Enterprise Printing Extensions v2.0 posted ready for Formal Vote
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
> Greetings, I've posted an update to IPP Enterprise Printing Extensions v2.0 in preparation for its Formal Approval vote. The new draft is here:
>https://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippepx20-20240102.pdfhttps://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippepx20-20240102.docxhttps://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippepx20-20240102-rev.pdfhttps://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ippepx20-20240102-rev.docx> Changes:
> •
> Fixed the copyright date in the footer and elsewhere;
> • Normalized the use case descriptions in section 3.2 to use lower case "job" and "printer"; and
> • Changed instances of "workgroup printer" to "printer" in the use cases and made some other minor editorial changes to the use cases to make them read better.
>> Happy new year!
> Smith
>> /**
> Smith Kennedy
> HP Inc.
> */ _______________________________________________
> ipp mailing list
>ipp at pwg.org>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp
________________________
Michael Sweet