Action Item #12 - Implementation changes

Greetings-

 

In reviewing the numerous issues
and proposals for those that require implementation changes, we noticed a
couple of proposals that worry us.

 

Realizing that vendors
already have "Legacy WSD Devices" deployed in the market, we think we
should work to keep those legacy devices interoperable, at least to some
extent, with future "OASIS WSD Clients". (Note "Legacy" vs.
"OASIS").

 

From what we can tell, all
of the other proposed resolutions to the list of issues allow at least *some*
functionality between Legacy Devices and OASIS Clients***, with the exception
of the following:

 

#61: Changing the namespace.
If this is changed, then none of the deployed Legacy devices will recognize any
of the SOAP actions from an OASIS client. Result: non-functioning WSD Device in
field.

 

#67, 68, 69: Security: If
these changes are made, then the security verification will fail. Result:
non-functioning *Secured* WSD Device in field - not sure how many exist of this
type though.

 

As for Canon, we're really
concerned about #61. We feel a backwards-compatible solution must be found, or
don't make the change at all.

 

Talk to everyone in ‘the
morning’,

-Devon

 

 

 *** an example of a
change that allows some functionality between Legacy Device and OASIS client
would be #009. In the worst case, the 

 Legacy device would
not be discovered by the new matching rule, BUT it could still be found if
searched for without any matching criteria.