RE: IPP> Re: IPP Scheme

"Bennett, Joel H" <Joel.Bennett@usa.xerox.com> Mon, 13 July 1998 16:59 UTC

Delivery-Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 12:59:07 -0400
Return-Path: ipp-owner@pwg.org
Received: from cnri.reston.va.us (ns [132.151.1.1]) by ietf.org (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id MAA02177 for <ietf-archive@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Jul 1998 12:59:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from lists.underscore.com (uscore-1.mv.com [199.125.85.30]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.8.7a) with ESMTP id MAA04248 for <ietf-archive@cnri.reston.va.us>; Mon, 13 Jul 1998 12:59:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA27967 for <ietf-archive@cnri.reston.va.us>; Mon, 13 Jul 1998 12:59:05 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by pwg.org (bulk_mailer v1.5); Mon, 13 Jul 1998 12:54:50 -0400
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by lists.underscore.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA27352 for ipp-outgoing; Mon, 13 Jul 1998 12:51:17 -0400 (EDT)
Content-return: allowed
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 08:49:53 PDT
From: "Bennett, Joel H" <Joel.Bennett@usa.xerox.com>
Subject: RE: IPP> Re: IPP Scheme
To: ipp@pwg.org
Message-id: <C565EF2D2B51D111B0BD00805F0D7A72727DBB@USA0111MS1>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-ipp@pwg.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ietf.org id MAA02177

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Keith Moore [mailto:moore@cs.utk.edu]
>
>> MIME type would seem to provide a most adequate filtering hook for IPP
>> and other protocols which also wish to ride on http.  
>
>Filtering is not the issue with ipp: vs. http:.  
>
>The problem with using http: for printers is that it hides the fact 
>that the resource is a printer.  Users then have to keep track of 
>that information separately, while user agents (web clients etc.) 
>are unable to take advantage of the fact that the resource is a 
>printer to improve their user interfaces.

I'm outside your group, strictly speaking, but I was checking this out
because I will be involved in testing the software that XEROX may eventually
develop for IPP.  I couldn't help but weigh in agreeing with Keith on this
one.

Even on existing web pages (never mind on my business cards) users DO see
URL's, and they (we) do make choices based on them.  For instance, when I
point at a link that says "MORE HELP" and the status window of my browser
says mailto:support@company.com I don't click, because I do NOT want to
waste my time, I'm looking for "more help" not an unresponsive support team.
Likewise, I would want to see ipp://support.microsoft.com so that I would
know that there's no point in clicking unless I've got a complaint/help
document I want to send them!  

Savvy users look for FTP:// instead of HTTP:// when they are trying to
upload/download files, because it's faster and easier than http:// (if only
because ftp:// calls my special ftp client, just the way you will eventually
want ipp:// to load your 
ipp client?)

Web users are used to the idea that http:// is a "viewable" resource.
something they want to LOOK at.  They don't want to do a search for "color
pictures" and get links to http:// sites which are actually printers where
they can "print color pictures."


In HIS hands,
                       Joel H. Bennett
mailto:Joel@soon.com
http://JBennett.home.ml.org