Subject: PMP> r/w objects

From: Harry Lewis <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 20:02:10 -0400

Classification:

One thing I don't think we determined very well during interop testing (and I
wanted to bring up at today's call but ran out of time) is to what extent r/w
objects have been implemented as r/w vs. r/o. Wouldn't it be important to a mgt
app to find out NO ONE allows you to WRITE and store in NVRAM the value of
prtInputMediaName (for example)?

Harry Lewis - IBM Printing Systems

---

From: JK Martin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 1997 20:27:06 -0400 (EDT)

Harry,

> prtInputMediaName (for example)?

I take it you're suggesting that the PMP group should perform some sort
of common test(s) on their products.  Do you have a specific proposal
in mind to determine the level of implementation consistency?

	...jay

---

From: Harry Lewis <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 10:22:08 -0400

Classification:

Interop tests are fun, but costly. No, I'd prefer a survey, unless there is no
interest at all.

----- Forwarded by Harry Lewis/Boulder/IBM on 04/30/97 07:49 AM ---

        [email-masked]
        04/29/97 06:29 PM

To: Harry Lewis/Boulder/IBM@IBMUS
cc: [email-masked]@internet
Subject: Re: PMP> r/w objects

Harry,

> objects have been implemented as r/w vs. r/o. Wouldn't it be important to a
mgt > app to find out NO ONE allows you to WRITE and store in NVRAM the value
of >
prtInputMediaName (for example)?

 ...jay