Or both, inevitably staged, based on Microsoft's NT5.0 direction.
Where is the real focus of IPP?
>Isn't what you call "print submission GUI" the everyday applications
>people use? like Word, Excel, Corel, Quicken. etc. etc.?
>
>So I wouldn't plan on changing any of it!
>
>Babak
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Robert.Herriot@Eng.Sun.COM [SMTP:Robert.Herriot@Eng.Sun.COM]
>>Sent: Thursday, February 20, 1997 3:27 PM
>>To: ipp@pwg.org; hastings@cp10.es.xerox.com
>>Subject: Re: IPP> MOD - Push back on simplifying Print operation response
>>
>>
>>>
>>> My concern is that either:
>>>
>>> 1. User friendly implmentations will make additional protocol calls
>>> to get job and printer status. That means that each Print operation
>>> will require three calls, not one. If we layer on HTTP that means
>>> a new session startup/teardown for each of the three calls.
>>
>>My assumption is that the GUI from which the Print submission is made is
>>a different process from the one showing status in most cases. In such an
>>environment, the Print submission GUI would probably not inform the
>>job status GUI about the changes. The primary issue is whether a print
>>submission GUI (or command) would inform the user of the special case
>>you site below where the printer is stopped and needs attention before it
>>will resume printing.