Gail wrote...
>So today I was presenting some information on the alert table, sub-unit status
>and the 3 hr variables. As we were discussing all of the information that
>needed to be accumulated in order to respond to each of these variables, I
>mentioned the work that was occurring in this illustrious group regarding the
>standardization of common conditions.
>>They asked how they could claim interoperability given that so few of the
>conditions were being addressed. Yes they understood that given this set of
>conditions they could extrapolate other conditions, but would this really
>provide the results for which the committee is looking?
Gail, at the test we showed two separately developed printer management
applications managing 6 separately developed printers. Was
interoperability demonstrated? YES. Is there room for improvement? YES.
The data we collected using the test tools will help us improve our
future implementations and could result in some minor adjustments to
the specifications themselves.
The effort you refer to, identification of the top 25 printer events
and clarification as to the values expected in the alert table, sub-
unit status and the 3 hrMIB variables is what we distilled as top
priority. Why do you question whether this will yield reasonable results?
Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems