>One final point about this ubiquity. It does not do us any good to
>design something that nobody builds. I do not know much about the
>history of TIPSI, but it seems a valid case in point. Although it
>is not necessarily a "pretty" protocol, it at least seems to address
>these issues of a host->device protocol (in a transport-independent
>fashion, to boot!). But nobody built it (sorry, Don), so who cares?
Been there, done that. Several of us, including many from outside
Lexmark worked long and hard on this with IEEE Std 1284.1-1997 (aka
TIPSI or NPAP) to create a robust device to printer submission and
management protocol.
An obviously uninformed executive from a two-letter printer company
said when asked about NPAP, "I don't know why anyone would need it."
The resultant adoption rate is history. I would love to have a widely
adopted protocol for this function but I am not highly motivated to
plow this ground again.
Tell you what, when you guys can get the work all done, I'll implement
it faster than anyone else can!
**********************************************
* Don Wright don@lexmark.com *
* Product Manager, Strategic Alliances *
* Lexmark International *
* 740 New Circle Rd *
* Lexington, Ky 40550 *
* 606-232-4808 (phone) 606-232-6740 (fax) *
**********************************************