Thanks for following up on this topic. You know, though, after reading
your proposed text, it suddenly hit me that we may not have been properly
analyzing the scenario in the first place.
A quick review of the basic scenario for those not in the PMP telecon
during which this new topic was first discussed:
Some printers can be configured such that a certain condition
normally considered as a "warning" (such as "toner low") can
be configured so as to stop the printer altogether, that is,
the event results in a critical condition, not a warning.
Now (assuming the above picture is correct), if we step back back
and look at the words, in essence what we have is the interesting
situation where the printer can actually *map* a warning condition
to a critical condition.
As such, for this scenario, a "toner low" condition is not at all
a non-critical (ie, warning) condition, but rather a very real
critical condition. There is nothing in the alert code tagged for
"toner low" that implies it is implicitly a non-critical alert, right?
If this is indeed true, then we don't have to worry about muddying up
the Top 25 Conditions table with a new situation in which a non-critical
alert is treated in some way as a critical alert.
Basic premise for everyone to agree upon (and maybe a useful bit of
clarifying text for the new Printer MIB draft):
The printer (and only the printer) decides which alert codes are
critical versus non-critical.
Does everyone agree with this? If so, then (following Bob's text) when
the user "continues" the printer (ie, acknowledges the warning condition),
then shouldn't the printer remove *both* the Offline and critical alert
(describing the toner low condition), and add a new non-critical alert
to say that the condition still remains (but is no longer critical)?
Comments?
...jay
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-- JK Martin | Email: jkm@underscore.com --
-- Underscore, Inc. | Voice: (603) 889-7000 --
-- 41C Sagamore Park Road | Fax: (603) 889-2699 --
-- Hudson, NH 03051-4915 | Web: http://www.underscore.com --
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Begin Included Message -----
From: Bob Pentecost <bpenteco@boi.hp.com>
To: "pmp@pwg.org" <pmp@pwg.org>, "'Chuck Adams'" <adamsc@pogo.WV.TEK.COM>
Subject: RE: PMP> Top 25 minus 4 conditions/alerts proposal
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 10:43:06 -0600
Encoding: 39 TEXT
During the Tuesday phone conference, I offered some wording about a
particular alert condition that is non-critical yet the printer stops due
to an option being set in the printer. Here's the wording which can be
added to Chuck's table if desired.
"When a non-critical condition occurs, the printer may choose to stop
printing by going offline (e.g., when a toner low condition occurs, the
printer might stop to notify the user); in which case there would be two
alerts entered into the alert table, one for the error condition and one
for the offline condition. The offline condition is considered to be the
critical alert that is stopping printing. Putting the printer online
without fixing the error condition causes the offline alert to be removed
from the table, but the non-critical alert remains in the table until the
error condition is fixed."
Bob
----------
From: Chuck Adams[SMTP:adamsc@pogo.WV.TEK.COM]
Sent: Thursday, May 01, 1997 9:33 AM
To: pmp@pwg.org
Subject: PMP> Top 25 minus 4 conditions/alerts proposal
Folks,
I have posted the proposed Appendix wording for the
the Top 25 minus 4 alerts document to the ftp site. See:
ftp://pwg.org/pub/pwg/pmp/contributions/err4.doc
ftp://pwg.org/pub/pwg/pmp/contributions/err4.pdf
I believe this reflects all the changes requested
in the Wednesday conference call.
Chuck Adams
Tektronix, Inc.
----- End Included Message -----