[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: subschema semantics (Was: Models: Schema references to undefined entities)

To: ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org
Subject: Re: subschema semantics (Was: Models: Schema references to undefined entities)
From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 22:17:08 -0800
In-reply-to: <HBF.20030212ltvt@bombur.uio.no>
References: <5.2.0.9.0.20030212135259.02535d38@127.0.0.1> <5.2.0.9.0.20030210074930.01a0cec8@127.0.0.1> <5.2.0.9.0.20030131162356.02939540@127.0.0.1> <HBF.20030131krqk@bombur.uio.no> <3E3AE99F.3090006@stroeder.com> <HBF.20030210tk2o@bombur.uio.no> <HBF.20030212mjwa@bombur.uio.no> <5.2.0.9.0.20030212135259.02535d38@127.0.0.1>

The [Models, Section 4.2.5] sentence:
	This attribute holds definitions of LDAP syntaxes
	supported in the subschema.

is not aligned with the position that server publishes
what it knows, not what it supports.  A number of other
subschema attributes sections have similar sentences.
I suggest deleting all occurrences of the phrase
"supported in the subschema" in the I-D.

Kurt

References:
- Re: subschema semantics (Was: Models: Schema references to undefined entities)
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- subschema semantics (Was: Models: Schema references to undefined entities)
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- Re: Models: Schema references to undefined entities
  - From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
- Re: Models: Schema references to undefined entities
  - From: Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>
- Re: subschema semantics (Was: Models: Schema references to undefined entities)
  - From: Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>
- Re: subschema semantics (Was: Models: Schema references to undefined entities)
  - From: Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>

Prev by Date: RE: Models: Matching Rule Uses
Next by Date: Re: Models: Matching Rule Uses
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread