Re: [Printing-architecture] Coding the Common Printing Dialog an dits interface - PPD and Foomatic extensions

[Lars Uebernickel <larsuebernickel@gmx.de>]

Glen,

Great idea - this way, we will have a better overview than browsing 
through endless threads here on the list.

I have started a requirements page on the OpenPrinting wiki with the 
examples you've given:

   http://www.linux-foundation.org/en/OpenPrinting/Requirements

I have also collected some information on this list about the 
specification of the PPD extensions and the API of the dialog:

   http://www.linux-foundation.org/en/OpenPrinting/Specifications


Petrie, Glen wrote:
> Till,
> 
> I am finally catching up on email...I have only scanned some them so far
> 
> There are a lot of good comments and a lot of information that looks like
> requirements and we should capture them.
> 
> Can I suggest that you create a wiki page to capture these requirements.  I
> would suggest a table like.  Then we as a group can help keep the
> requirement table up to date.
> 
> 
> 
> Req   Requirement                       Approved        First
> No.                                     Pending         Implementation
>                                         Removed         Version
> ----- ------------------------------  --------------  -----------------
> 1001  Application and Print Dialog      Approved        Prototype
>       communication SHALL use DBUS 
>       expect for PDF content
> ----- ------------------------------  --------------  -----------------
> 1002  Icons for options and choices     Approved        Prototype
>       SHALL be UU-encoded.
> ----- ------------------------------  --------------  -----------------
> 1003  Application MAY send preview      Approved	  Version 1.0
>       of a document page to the print
>       dialog
> ----- ------------------------------  --------------  -----------------
> 1004  Application SHALL send preview    Pending
>       of a document page in PDF         Sending preview as PDF is a burden
>       format.				    to the dialog.  Since previews
>                                         are scaled down version of the 
>                                         actual page a icon graphical
>                                         format is sufficient.
> 
> 
> 
> acceptable requirement keys word for the requirements should be limited to
> 
> SHALL
> MUST
> MAY
> 
> SHALL NOT
> MUST NOT
> MAY NOT
> 
> Key word like SHOULD have no meaning when discussing requirements and are
> impossible for determining if the requirement is implemented; either a
> required is required (SHALL) or is optional (MAY).  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Printing-architecture mailing list
> Printing-architecture@lists.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/printing-architecture