This meeting was announced and chaired by Smith Kennedy.
These minutes were prepared by Ira McDonald with much help from Smith Kennedy.
- Review agenda and state PWG IP Policy - Ira McDonald as minute taker - Proposed Agenda: (1) Review previous minutes and action items (2) Next steps/approval of Anne's work-in-progress Infographic? (3) Postulated Tiger Team for review of IPP-related bug reports? (4) More generally, maybe Self-Cert exceptions process? (5) Imaging Model definition - "intent-based" vs. "process-based" (6) OP query about PWG 2017 meetings? Joint PWG/OPS in April 2017 at Apple?
- Review minutes of SC on 19 May 2016 - Approved as posted - Review all open action items - See 'Previous Action Items' belowACTION: All SC members to create a pwg.org account and a GitHub account for use reviewing IPP Everywhere Self Certification and code changes
- Discussion - Anne sent Infographic first draft (reviewed by SC) - Infographic final draft is TBD (soon) - SC members to be responsive on email thread to provide prompt feedback
- Discussion - Let IPP WG (or whatever WG team needs to do this) convene a tiger team at a time separate from the typical WG meeting times to allow review of proposed code changes / resolution of defects in pull requestsACTION: Smith to ask Ira / Mike to convene a tiger team for IPP WG to review bugs / proposed fixes
- Discussion - Would require reviewers to have an account on www.pwg.org - Should someone from a company with a device that is not passing submit certification results and requesting exceptions, and let that process drive changing the test suite? - Or should bug fixes be submitted and then the vendor waits for a new release of the self-certification test suite?ACTION: Smith to pose Self-Cert exceptions question to IPP WG officers to start
- Discussion - Mike's thoughts: "The whole intent-vs-process can-of-worms probably needs some extended discussion in the IPP and SM WGs, and maybe a good topic at the next face-to-face as an "all hands" session. Like I mentioned in my last post to the IPP list, print services that use physical devices have to necessarily deal with hard constraints - the question is basically where do we draw the line and what implementation guidance do we provide for edge cases?" - Consider a whitepaper that outlines the "PWG Imaging Model and Design Ethos" - Condensed tight description and value proposition of this, which is currently spread across a number of different specification documents in obscure locations - Talking points - PWG IPP is intent-based as opposed to CIP4 JDF model which is process-based - intent == User intent (i.e., human user of an IPP Client) - Remove need for User to be intimately aware of the Device details - Print Servers don't want to present all the Job constraints - Job portability is diminished by process-based Job submissions - Value of overt Job Ticket attributes separate from the Job stream versus transforming the Job stream content before transmission (perhaps in an obfuscated way) - Late Binding of Job Ticket attributes to achieve higher output fidelity
- Discussion - PWG Fall 2016 meeting - Lexmark willing to host - Early November better for Smith... - Physical versus Virtual? - Smith to get TCG and 3MF calendars added to other orgs' calendar page - Ira notes TCG new public website has broken calendar - to be resolvedACTION: Smith to run an early SurveyMonkey on PWG Fall 2016 meeting to see if people are free to travel then and what week?
- SC - Thursday 23 June 9am Pacific / 12pm Eastern - (Smith unavailable 06/09 and 06/16) - SC - Thursday 7 June 9am Pacific / 12pm Eastern (tentative) - may conflict w/ US Holiday July 4th