Re: IPP> IPPv2 Statement Of Work Update

From: Ira McDonald (blueroofmusic@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Mar 04 2008 - 22:42:24 EST

  • Next message: Hastings, Tom N: "RE: IPP> IPPv2 Statement Of Work Update [ISSUE: need to define what a "feature" is]"

    Hi Tom,

    My two cents - these profiles (i.e., version 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, etc.) should ONLY
    make whole IPP standards specs (IETF or PWG) mandatory, conditionally
    mandatory, or optional.

    Although there has been speculation that individual operations (but NOT
    attributes) might be raised in requirements level from their original specs,
    I'm opposed to doing so.

    The sole function of the IPP/2.x effort should be simply to encourage more
    widespread implementation of the many IPP extensions (a set of content
    much larger than the entire original IPP/1.1 protocol). And to simplify the
    description of such higher implementation functionality for end users.

    Changing specific requirements levels *within* particular IPP specs is a
    slippery slope that would destroy the IPP/2.x effort (and violate the PWG
    Process/2.0 rules).

    Bear in mind that the PWG Process/2.0 is much more rigorous than past
    PWG practice. Actual prototypes are REQUIRED before a document can
    even enter PWG Last Call, much less be adopted. It remains to be seen
    if this can be achieved for IPP/2.x.

    Cheers,
    - Ira

    On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 7:44 PM, Hastings, Tom N <Tom.Hastings@xerox.com> wrote:
    > The statement of work says:
    >
    > * OBJ-1 Include a reference to all IPP Standards Track documents,
    > starting from version 1.1.
    > * OBJ-2 All current IPP features are to be included as a requirement or
    > an option.
    > * OBJ-3 All features are to be classified as Mandatory, Conditionally
    > Mandatory, or Optional.
    >
    > What is a "feature"? What is the level of granularity of a feature? An
    > operation, an object, an attribute, or an attribute value?
    >
    > In other words, at what level of detail will the "Mandatory",
    > "Conditionally Mandatory" or "Optional" be specified at: an operation,
    > an object, an attribute, or an attribute value?
    >
    > The PWG Semantic model lists all of the operations, objects, attributes,
    > and values (though spelled "funny"), along with the documents in which
    > they are defined, if that is a help is compiling a profile template.
    >
    > Tom
    >
    >
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: owner-ipp@pwg.org [mailto:owner-ipp@pwg.org] On Behalf Of
    > Ron.Bergman@ricoh-usa.com
    > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 09:56
    > To: ipp@pwg.org
    > Subject: IPP> IPPv2 Statement Of Work Update
    >
    >
    > The IPPv2 Charter has been converted into a Statement of Work.
    >
    > Send any comments to the mail list.
    >
    >
    > ftp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/ippv2-docs/wd-ippv2-statement-of-work-2008
    > 0221.pdf
    > (.doc)
    >
    >
    >
    >

    -- 
    Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
    Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
    Blue Roof Music/High North Inc
    email: blueroofmusic@gmail.com
    winter:
      579 Park Place  Saline, MI  48176
      734-944-0094
    summer:
      PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839
      906-494-2434
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Mar 04 2008 - 22:42:32 EST