Hi,
Canon Japan emailed feedback on the IPP-Presets spec last Friday (12/1) but the IPP mail archive doesn't show it yet so I'm resending Canon's feedback.
Canon wants to add the specification of passing "preset-name" strings to the printer, so that user can use unique function of printer, that is difficult to define as standard.
Alternatively, Smith added following description.
"A Client MUST copy all Preset member attributes (except "preset-name") from the selected Preset to the Job Creation Request, either with the values from the Preset or alternate values subsequently chosen by the User.
This includes member attributes that the Client does not natively support."
"A Client SHOULD list available Presets by name wherever it presents printing choices to the User. The Presets might have originated in the Printer or they might be local to the Client. When a User selects a Preset, the Client copies all Preset member attributes to the Job Creation Request.
Client implementers might want to consider appropriate behavior in response to the User changing a setting and then the User chooses a Preset that overrides that earlier selection.
The Client could notify the User that the setting will be changed.
Alternately, the Client could apply the Preset but not change the setting changed by the User, or let the selected Preset overwrite the previous User selection."
For this description, we pointed out "the data size of the Presets could be quite large."
So,
"Our concern is that client may end up NOT supporting Presets feature because of the issues above."
Above problem, we think WG have not done enough discussion.
As we interviewed some client members, they are thinking of some limitation for implementation of IPP preset.
This means they are going not to be compliant with "A Client MUST copy all Preset member attributes".
We are afraid it depends on client implementation.
These are reasons we cannot agree current IPP Preset Registration.
Our requests are,
1. Please include "preset-name" again.
We heard the major reason for rejected is that adding the "preset-name" make printer implementation complex.
But, for non-support printers, only skipping "preset-name".
2. Please answer, or more discuss about depending on client implementation problem.
Again, we are afraid client may NOT support ALL COPY, or IPP PRESET itself.
Best regards,
Rick Yardumian, Canon
-----Original Message-----
From: ipp [mailto:ipp-bounces at pwg.org] On Behalf Of Michael Sweet
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 7:25 PM
To: PWG IPP WG Reflector
Subject: [IPP] IPP Last Call of IPP Presets Registration (Ends 10pm December 1, 2017)
All,
This message begins the IPP Last Call of the IPP Presets registration which is available at the following URLs:
http://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ipppreset-20171116.pdfhttp://ftp.pwg.org/pub/pwg/ipp/wd/wd-ipppreset-20171116.odt
Please review this registration and respond to the IPP mailing list (reply-all to this message is fine) with any feedback you have for the proposed registration.
This IPP Last Call ends at 10pm PT on December 1, 2017.
_________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer
_______________________________________________
ipp mailing list
ipp at pwg.orghttps://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp