IPP Mail Archive: Re: IPP> Re: REQ - Last minute scenario comments

Re: IPP> Re: REQ - Last minute scenario comments

Larry Masinter (masinter@parc.xerox.com)
Sat, 1 Feb 1997 10:19:43 PST

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Randy Turner: "Re: IPP> Re: REQ - Last minute scenario comments"
Previous message: JK Martin: "Re: IPP> Re: REQ - Last minute scenario comments"
Maybe in reply to: Harry Lewis: "IPP> Re: REQ - Last minute scenario comments"
Next in thread: Randy Turner: "Re: IPP> Re: REQ - Last minute scenario comments"

I think I might have left out the context of my argument. I'm not
arguing for always embedding job control information into PDLs. I'm
arguing that the STANDARD PROTOCOL should have a clear definition of
what is job control and what is print data. I was arguing AGAINST the
situtation where a gateway would like to say "don't send this
information in the job control, only send it in the print data,
because I'm a gateway to a device that only knows about print data".

I see how my analysis taken outside of that context might have been
seen as an argument for putting EVERYTHING inside the print data, but
that's not what I meant at all.

Larry

Next message: Randy Turner: "Re: IPP> Re: REQ - Last minute scenario comments"
Previous message: JK Martin: "Re: IPP> Re: REQ - Last minute scenario comments"
Maybe in reply to: Harry Lewis: "IPP> Re: REQ - Last minute scenario comments"
Next in thread: Randy Turner: "Re: IPP> Re: REQ - Last minute scenario comments"