Subject: IPP> Get Attributes

From: "steve gebert Dept:ecg SN:579517 Div:ISM Ext" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 97 09:33:33 MST

I know this has probably been mentioned before, but as I am getting
more into implementation I am finding the use of Get-Attributes on
both the Printer and Job object to be ackward with regard to
implementation. It is the only case of a method being dependent
on the object and introduces some special case processing that could
be avoided by having 2 distinct methods. It seems that with regard
to consistency it would be better to have 2 methods that are
similar and consistent with the other methods (Get-Printer-Attributes and
Get-Job-Attributes). In addition, I think, at least based on my limited
experience, that perhaps the implementations could be a little simpler.

Since part of the reason for prototyping is to provide feedback to the
spec developers I thought I would mention this.  Steve

---

From: Carl-Uno Manros <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 09:57:56 -0800

>spec developers I thought I would mention this.  Steve

Steve,

I have made the suggestion repeatedly that we should have two operations, 
but I was apparently never able to deliver strong enough arguments to get
it changed. I still think it is a good idea, but have to leave it to the 
editors to determine if they want to do this last minute change.

Carl-Uno

---

From: "Turner, Randy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 11:34:59 -0800

The awkwardness of having get-attributes for both
printer and job objects depends on how you implement
the server. If you always have one server handling
all requests, then you have to check the URL
on the get-attributes request to determine if the URL
points to a job or printer object. If however, the
server is multithreaded, and spawns multiple threads
(one per job), then the job-handler threads each have
their own URL and any get-attributes request sent
to a job-URL goes to the job object "thread" and no
check has to be done.

Randy

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	steve gebert Dept:ecg SN:579517 Div:ISM Ext
> [SMTP:[email-masked]]
> Sent:	Wednesday, December 17, 1997 8:34 AM
> To:	[email-masked]
> Subject:	IPP> Get Attributes
>

---

From: [email-masked] (Robert Herriot)
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 12:33:40 -0800

I have noticed the same problem during my implementation.  

With printer operations except Get-Attributes, the presence of a job-id
is an error. With job operations whose target is a printer-uri except
Get-Attributes, the absence of a job-id is an error. Because
Get-Attributes is both a job and printer operation, neither the
presence nor absence of job-id is an error. Rather it determines
whether the operation is a printer or job operation.

I am leaning towards Steve's idea to have two operations Get-Job-Attributes
and Get-Printer-Attributes.

> From [email-masked] Wed Dec 17 11:53:33 1997
> 
>

---

From: Carl Kugler <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 15:54:05 -0500

>the server.

Then why not make 2 separate methods and avoid constraining the
implementation?  Keep in mind that implementers don't always get to start from
a clean slate.  One might be reusing legacy code, or extending an existing
product, or using a platform that makes multi-threading difficult.

  -Carl

        [email-masked]
        12/17/97 07:59 AM
Please respond to [email-masked] @ internet

To: [email-masked] @ internet, [email-masked] @ internet
cc:
Subject: RE: IPP> Get Attributes

Randy