[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: More on DIT content rules
>I think the equivalent statements from X.501 are:
>If no DIT content rule is present for a structural object class, then
>entries of that class shall contain only the attributes
>permitted by the structural object class definition.
>An entry governed by a DIT content rule may, in addition to the
>object class of the DIT structure rule, be
>associated with a subset of the auxiliary object classes identified by
>DIT content rule. This association is reflected in
>the entry's objectClass attribute.
>That does seem to say that if there is no DIT content rule, the entry
>cannot belong to any auxiliary object classes. And it does seem strange
Yes. looks like X.501 requires a DIT content rule to be related with a
structrual object class,
should an entry of the class be associated with any auxiliary object
Is it the intention of the I-D to follow the X.501 model in this respect ?
Jong Hyuk Choi
IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center - Enterprise Linux Group
P. O. Box 218, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
(phone) 914-945-3979 (fax) 914-945-4425 TL: 862-3979