Re: which syntax for which assertions?

["Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>]

At 09:07 PM 5/6/2004, Jim Sermersheim wrote:
>After reviewing protocol and models, I think I mostly agree, but I think
>there is still room for confusion. For example, [Models] says that
>matching rules are used "in determining which individual values are be
>added or deleted during performance of a Modify operation,".  This could
>leave one wondering whether the assertion syntax is supposed to be
>used.

Well, the abstract data type associated with the assertion syntax is
used in such matching.  For objectIdentifierFirstComponentMatch,
one key part of the rule is how the attribute value of the assertion
syntax is derived from the attribute value so that provided value
(of the assertion syntax) can be compared against it.  If we're
comparing two attribute values, then both need to transform to the
values of the assertion syntax for comparison.

This implies that equality rules need to define matching in terms of
assertion values.  Otherwise it won't work properly in both contexts
(add/modify v. AVA).

>However, I don't think this concern is sufficient to warrant any change
>to models.

I'd actually be worried that more text might be confusing.

>Nevermind!

Okay.

>One final suggestion is to clarify that matching rules which name
>syntaxes different from the syntax of the attribute they are paired with
>should provide a means whereby the assertion attribute syntax can be
>derived by the attribute syntax (this is for the case of modify/add). It
>may be that the third paragraph of Section 4.1 is saying just that and

Yes.

Kurt