Hi,
I agree with Tom - collating some, but not all documents in a Job
isn't a reasonable scenario. I vote against Dennis' suggestion.
Cheers,
- Ira McDonald
High North Inc
-----Original Message-----
From: Zehler, Peter [mailto:PZehler@crt.xerox.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2003 1:15 PM
To: IPP Discussion List (IPP@pwg.org)
Cc: PWG Semantic Model WG (sm@pwg.org)
Subject: SM> Remaining issue in Document object spec
All,
I did not capture the resolution (if any) on the following issue from Dennis
Carney.
ISSUE:
I definitely believe that we need a "Document-equivalent" of
job-collation-type. It would have different semantics, since the Job level
semantics include the concept of documents, but I believe that since it is
useful to know whether a Job is doing collated or uncollated copies, it
would also be useful to know the same for Documents.
Proposed resolutions:
<TH>I disagree. If we did add a Document attribute, it would need to have
the same value as at the Job Level, since you can't collate some documents
and not collate other documents in the same job. We don't duplicate on the
Document object other Job level attributes that apply to the job as a whole,
such as "job-name", "job-hold", "job-priority", "job-finishing".</TH>
Before I put the updated document I would like to get consensus. Please
respond on the IPP list.
Opinions?
Pete
Peter Zehler
XEROX
Xerox Innovation Group
Email: PZehler@crt.xerox.com
Voice: (585) 265-8755
FAX: (585) 422-7961
US Mail: Peter Zehler
Xerox Corp.
800 Phillips Rd.
M/S 128-25E
Webster NY, 14580-9701
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jul 02 2003 - 11:52:44 EDT