[IPP] Fwd: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2911 (3072)

FWIW, filed this errata based on the consensus that multiple-document-handling is the attribute to use for collated copies, so 2911 needs a minor correction...

Begin forwarded message:

> From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
> Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2911 (3072)
> Date: January 4, 2012 9:57:41 AM PST
> To: sisaacson@novell.com, tom.hastings@alum.mit.edu, robert.herriot@pahv.xerox.com, debryro@uvsc.edu, papowell@astart.com, presnick@qualcomm.com, stpeter@stpeter.im, carl@manros.com
> Cc: msweet@apple.com, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
> 
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC2911,
> "Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and Semantics".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=2911&eid=3072
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Michael Sweet <msweet@apple.com>
> 
> Section: 4.2.4
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> This attribute is relevant only if a job consists of two or more
> documents. This attribute MUST be supported with at least one value
> 
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> This attribute is relevant to jobs consisting of one or more
> documents. This attribute MUST be supported with at least one value
> 
> 
> Notes
> -----
> Per consensus of the IPP working group in the Printer Working Group, the "multiple-document-handling" attribute *is* applicable to single-document jobs since it is the only common attribute that can be used to request copy collation.
> 
> The other collation attribute ("sheet-collate" from RFC3381])interacts with "multiple-document-handling" in some non-obvious ways and requires clients and printers to support two different attributes for simple collation. The "sheet-collate" attribute also does not address how finishing options are applied to copies while "multiple-document-handling" does.
> 
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG)
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC2911 (draft-ietf-ipp-model-v11-07)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Internet Printing Protocol/1.1: Model and Semantics
> Publication Date    : September 2000
> Author(s)           : T. Hastings, Ed., R. Herriot, R. deBry, S. Isaacson, P. Powell
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Internet Printing Protocol
> Area                : Applications
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG

_________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.