|
Actually, what's being documented here has always been true. Most of the text is being pulled in part or whole (summarized or not) from X.501. Previously, one had to find these statements by reading hte ITU documents.
Jim
>>> Michael Ströder <michael@stroeder.com> 10/29/03 10:34:10 AM >>> HI! Still browsing through draft-ietf-ldapbis-models-09... In section 2.4.3 there's written: [..] If no DIT content rule is associated with the structural object class of the entry, the entry cannot belong to any auxiliary object class. I don't understand this statement. Shouldn't the 'cannot' be 'can'? From section 4.1.6.: MUST, MAY, and NOT specify lists of attribute types which are required, allowed, or precluded, respectively, from appearing in entries subject to this DIT content rule; and <extensions> describe extensions. I'm a little bit scared of 'MUST' and 'MAY' extending the 'MUST' and 'MAY' of object classes. I consider this being redundant to schema design with object classes. Personally I'd appreciate a hint in the text stating that use of 'MUST' and 'MAY' in a DIT content rules is NOT RECOMMENDED since clients or servers might not support DIT content rules. Well, such a hint might be a little too much in the direction of a best practice guide. Ciao, Michael. |