> Paper out is somewhat easier to define. But to flag a paper out
> warning for a *printer* when the printer still has paper would seem to
> be very confusing.
>
> Although the February test will have lots to do, I think the handling
> of subunit status is a fairly wide open area for checking consistency.
>
> Bill Wagner, DPI
Bill, I appreciate your response. I agree that subUnitStatus should be
part of our test plan if possible.
I'm not sure I recognize the distinction between what you refer to as
"paper out for the printer" vs. the subUnit, however. Since the alert
table entry includes group and group index, I've always viewed the
alert as fundamentally subUnit specific.
Of course, here again is possibly why we're in need of interop testing!
Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems