RE: Models: Matching Rule Uses

["Steven Legg" <steven.legg@adacel.com.au>]

Jim,

Jim Sermersheim wrote:
> Why not?

No reason why not. X.500 doesn't restrict what matching rules can be used
in an extensible match. Directory administrators may be able to, depending
on how one interprets the matchingRuleUse attribute.

Regards,
Steven

> I may have an attribute who's syntax is caseExactMatch. I may
> want to search for values of that attribute using an extensible match
> filter where the rule is caseIgnoreMatch.
> 
> Jim
> 
> >>> "Ramsay, Ron" <Ron.Ramsay@ca.com> 1/30/03 4:30:59 PM >>>
> caseIgnoreMatch is not an *extensible* matching rule.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hallvard B Furuseth [mailto:h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no] 
> Sent: Friday, 31 January 2003 09:34
> To: ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org 
> Subject: Models: Matching Rule Uses
> 
> 
> [Models] says:
> 
> > 4.1.4. Matching Rule Uses
> >
> >  A matching rule use lists the attributes which are suitable for use
> >  with an extensible matching rule
> 
> Please add something like "(in addition to those uses expressed in
> AttributeType descriptions)".
> 
> BTW, how do Matching Rule Uses relate to the statements in [Syntaxes]
> about which matching rules can be used with which syntaxes?
> For example, [Syntaxes] 5.2.6 says:
> 
> >   The caseIgnoreMatch rule compares an assertion value of the
> Directory
> >   String syntax to an attribute value of a syntax (e.g. the
> Directory
> >   String, Printable String, Country String or Telephone Number
> syntax)
> >   whose corresponding ASN.1 type is DirectoryString or one of its
> >   alternative string types, e.g. PrintableString.
> 
> -- 
> Hallvard
> 
> 
>