Re: SUBCLASSING, again

[Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>]

Kurt D. Zeilenga writes:
> For instance, it is quite clear in X.501 that which auxiliary
> classes an entry can belongs to is controlled solely by the
> DIT Content Rule.  However, the entry's structural object
> class has a auxiliary super class, then the entry belong to
> that auxiliary class even when the DIT content rule disallows
> it from belong to that auxiliary class.

I guess that would mean that an entry of that structural object class
cannot be created unless a DIT content rule allows the auxiliary class.

-- 
Hallvard