Hi Mike,
Agreed - a good idea to add this attribute.
Cheers,
- Ira
*Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)*
*Chair - SAE Trust Anchors and Authentication TF*
*Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG*
*Co-Chair - TCG Metadata Access Protocol SG*
*Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WGSecretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer
Working GroupCo-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WGIETF
Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIBBlue Roof Music / High North
Inchttp://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic
<http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic>http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc
<http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc>mailto: blueroofmusic at gmail.com
<blueroofmusic at gmail.com>(permanent) PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
906-494-2434*
On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 9:07 AM Michael Sweet via ipp <ipp at pwg.org> wrote:
> All,
>> I am preparing an updated draft of the IPP Job Extensions v2.1
> specification (itself an errata update) and one of the comments from the
> initial review requested a note for accounting implementations WRT
> [date-]time-at-processing.
>> Since some accounting solutions use processing time for billing, and since
> processing time is not "time-at-completed - time-at-processing", it
> occurred to me that we could simply add an attribute to report the actual
> processing time.
>> Thoughts?
>> ________________________
> Michael Sweet
>> _______________________________________________
> ipp mailing list
>ipp at pwg.org>https://www.pwg.org/mailman/listinfo/ipp>-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.pwg.org/pipermail/ipp/attachments/20221101/c75636d0/attachment.html>