Hi Michael,
We also agreed at today's SM telecon to remove the Create-Document
and Send-Data operations entirely from the JobX spec. They can
be added in some future IPP/1.2, if someone wants them. Also we
agreed to remove entirely the new Close-Job operation.
Although Close-Job is a good idea (a PSI idea), it's not useful
if it's not REQUIRED and if the previous RFC 2911 last-document
or empty document with Send-Document are not deprecated. We're
not ready to rock the boat and change RFC 2911 behavior.
Thanks for all your good feedback.
Pete Zehler will be posting _one_ more revised IPP Document object
shortly. After that, all review will be by email through and including
the Portland face-to-face coming up in mid-June.
Next week at the SM telecon, we'll review the new Overrides spec
(replaces the Experimental PWG 5100.4 when adopted).
Next week at the IPPFAX telecon, we'll review the new JobX spec
(the useful operations, without the Document object itself).
Cheers,
- Ira McDonald
High North Inc
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Sweet [mailto:mike at easysw.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 1:16 PM
To: Hastings, Tom N
Cc: Dennis Carney; ipp at pwg.org
Subject: Re: IPP> Document Object Spec Comments... [Validate-Job for
each document vs. Create-Document/Send-Data]
Hastings, Tom N wrote:
> Note that we've added new status codes for Send-Document and Send-URI in
the
> latest Document Object spec:
>> 13 Status codes
>> This section defines additional status codes for use with multi-document
> jobs.
>> 13.1 server-error-too-many-jobs (0x050B)
>> The client has attempted to create a Job using any of the Job Creation
> operations which would exceed the capacity of the Printer and/or the
policy
> for this user or type of job. The client SHOULD NOT try again later.
>> 13.2 server-error-too-many-documents (0x050C)
>> The client has attempted to create a Document using any of the Document
> Creation operations which would exceed the capacity of the Printer for
this
> Job and/or the policy for this user or type of job. The client SHOULD NOT
> try again later.
I haven't had a chance to read the latest version (did manage to
print it out, but been too busy to sit and read it yet), but this
is definitely good news!
--
______________________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products mike at easysw dot com
Printing Software for UNIX http://www.easysw.com