Subject: Re: PMP> alert condition standardization and conformance

From: [email-masked] (JK Martin)
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 97 17:13 EST

Gail,

> Was interoperability really shown?  Given the variance is the results, I
> definately question your statement.  Jay, as one of those application
> management vendors, what do you think?

I'm pretty much in agreement with Harry.  While it would be really great
to agree on 110% of all defined conditions (whatever those may be, given
the target printer technology), we really MUST define a reasonably small
common set, then agree upon how to handle those common conditions regardless
of target printer technology.

Once agreement is reached for the common set--and those agreements are indeed
implemented in all vendors' products--then we can start in on the remaining
set of conditions, etc.

That is, assuming some other area of technology doesn't first grab our
attention and divert our resources...  ;-)

As Harry pointed out, though, you should definitely add to the existing
"top 25 list" as you feel is necessary.  The only caveat is that you will
probably have to perform all the work to get those new additions onto the
the list!

	...jay

----------------------------------------------------------------------
--  JK Martin               |  Email:   [email-masked]          --
--  Underscore, Inc.        |  Voice:   (603) 889-7000              --
--  41C Sagamore Park Road  |  Fax:     (603) 889-2699              --
--  Hudson, NH 03015-4915   |  Web:     http://www.underscore.com   --
----------------------------------------------------------------------