Subject: coverpage discussion

From: "Michael J. Ruhl" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 1999 11:58:52 -0800

With regards to my latest draft for coverpage identification,
draft-ietf-fax-coverpage-01.txt.

Graham, and I have been discussing section 3.2 and would like some
more comments.

In section 3.2, I use the word "probable" to describe the posibility
that coverpage information has been included with an "onramped" message.
Graham and I have been discussion this usage and would like some more
input.  Graham has suggested that "implicit" may be more correct.
The following has been our conversation.

G: Denotes Grahams comments
M: Denotes mine.

The particualar section we are discussion (3.2) currently says:

3.2 Coverpage is Possibly Present

     When a fax-over-SMTP application receives a message that might have
     a coverpage, it MUST generate the message in the following manner.

     1) The Content-Coverpage header MUST be used.  The headers value
MUST
        be "probable";

     2) A Content-Description header SHOULD be used.  The text SHOULD
        indicate that the MIME part might contain a coverpage.

     When a fax message is "onramped" (converting a fax message received
     from the GSTN network to an SMTP message), there is no way to
     determine if coverpage information has been included.  However,
     because GSTN fax users usually include coverpage information with
fax
     transmissions, it is very likely that an onramped message will
     include a coverpage information as part of the message.
     Note: it is entirely possible for coverpage information to be a
     separate page, or included with the first page of the message.

Here is our discussion:

G: Is this idea of a "probable" cover page helpful?  What decision
G: is a receiving system to make based on this information?
G: I think a more useful approach might be "cover-page=implicit"
G: which says that any cover page, if present, is implicit in the
G: message content. (Or "cover-page=embedded"?)

M: I chose the word "probable" because there is a good "probability"
M: that the coverpage is included in the message.  I think "embedded"
M: indicates that it is there, not that it might be there.  I also
M: think that "implicit" is still quite a strong word.   The intent
M: is to give as much information about the message as possible.
M: This particular section will allow a receiver to know that the
M: message was most likely "onramped" and has a good chance of having
M: a coverpage.  I don't want to specify what he is to do with that
M: information, just make sure that he has it.

G: Yes, I see that.  But what is a recipient to do with it?  I think
G: we should try and be clear about exactly what is meant, as far as
G: possible, to leave as little wiggle-room as reasonably possible.
G: It's clear that a handling agent cannot be clairvoyant.  I felt
G: that "implicit" was OK because it implies that the sender felt
G: that there was enough information in the message to perform the
G: cover page functions of routing, etc.  It may be that the sender
G: felt that the destination fax number used was enough-- I often
G: send faxes that way to someone's personal fax.

Finally Graham suggested:

G: I think this is probably a point for wider debate.

And I agree.

I am not completely happy with "probable", and I think that "implicit"
is a little too strong.  Any comments are welcome.  So let me know
what you think, or if my words or intent are not clear or useful.

Thanks!

Mike

---

From: James Rafferty <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 1999 16:21:43 -0500

Mike,  

>draft-ietf-fax-coverpage-01.txt.
This is to bring up an additional discussion point.     

Right now, nothing is mentioned about one of the most likely cover page
cases:   

-  where a fax cover page is included in the Internet fax transmission and
then 
is used to help complete transmission via an offramp.    

I think that some guidance should be provided about how the Internet fax
coverpage can be used to help meet the Offramp cover page requirements.
An example would also be useful .  

James  
*------------------------------------------------*
James Rafferty			
President, Human Communications LLC	
12 Kevin Drive			
Danbury, CT  06811-2901		
USA					
Voice/Fax:  +1-203-746-4367
Email/Internet Fax:  [email-masked]
	 [email-masked]
     [email-masked]

HC Web Site:  http://www.humancomm.com  
*---------------------------------------------------

---

From: Dan Wing <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 12:56:01 -0800 (PST)

On Tue, 9 Mar 1999 16:21 -0500, James  Rafferty wrote:

> - where a fax cover page is included in the Internet fax transmission
> and then is used to help complete transmission via an offramp.

Are you referring to using OCR to somehow parse the coverpage to
determine the recipient?

-Dan Wing