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

Re: filter-05 comments

Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:

In section 5 (LDAP Search Filter Definition), the Filter and
SubstringFilter definitions do not match those in [Protocol].

In section 6 (String Search Filter Definition), "section 1.3
(Common ABNF Productions) of [Models]" should be section 1.4.

OK. Cross document references are hard to keep up with... thanks for catching these two.


Section 7 (Examples):

This paragraph seems to have been garbled:


 The third example illustrates the use of the ":dn" notation to
 indicate that matching rule "2.4.6.8.10" should be used when making
 comparisons,


No, the ":2.4.6.8.10" notation indicates that. 

Right; I am not sure what happened but I will fix that paragraph.


 and that the attributes of an entry's distinguished name
 should be considered part of the entry when evaluating the match.



Finally,


 The sixth and final example demonstrates assertion of a BER encoded
 value.



How?  It's no different from the fourth example, except for the
numericoid.  Does a numericoid in a string filter indicate BER?
If so, the document should say so.

No, the description of the example is somewhat misleading. I am not sure the example is very valuable. It does show use of an OID instead of an attribute name.

-Mark