Re: changes to ASN.1

[Mark Wahl <Mark.Wahl@sun.com>]

Jim Sermersheim wrote:
> 
> I'm wondering, in general, what changes can or should be made to any ASN.1 constructs in the bis documents. I would assume minimal if any at all.
> 
> Specifically, I've noticed the following in RFC 2251 (none of which are "real" problems):
> 
> In 4.6, it would be nice to rename the innermost field called "modification" to "attribute". I find it's hard when corresponding to refer to this field due to confusion with the name of it's encapsulating sequence. Also, I'm not sure why there is a need for the definition of AttributeTypeAndValues. Can't Attribute be used? 

No, it's not an attribute.  It's a type and a list of values.  An attribute
is also a type and a list of values.  But that does not mean they are the same:
an attribute has additional SEMANTICS beyond the BER encoding. 

Mark Wahl
Sun Microsystems Inc.