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

Re: reframing the Empty IA5 string discussion


Ron,

Ramsay, Ron wrote:
But, for example, does caseIgnoreMatch say that " " and "" are equal? 

I would say yes. Both strings are empty of significant characters.

> I would
> have thought that "    " and " " are equal and that neither equals "".

I would say that "    " and " " and "" are all equal as they are all
empty of significant characters.


If this were the case, I would expect the next in your sequence of
> caseIgnoreIA5Match lines would be
caseIgnoreIA5Match says " f" and " " are equal. 

Each step removes the last character from each of two strings that match
in the previous step.

Regards,
Steven


Ron

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org
[mailto:owner-ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org]On Behalf Of Steven Legg
Sent: Thursday, 11 November 2004 16:21
To: Kurt D. Zeilenga
Cc: ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org
Subject: Re: reframing the Empty IA5 string discussion



Kurt,

Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:

I see that there are few reasonable options here:
1) IA5 strings precludes zero-length values
2) IA5 strings allows zero-length values
  2A) a zero-length values only matches a zero-length value
  2B) a zero-length value matches " " (and all values
      equivalent to " ").

I prefer 1 over 2A over 2B (see prior posts for why). 


There are two separate questions here. Whether or not the IA5 String syntax
is restricted to preclude zero-length values (I don't care either way) there
is still the potential for zero-length IA5String values to be compared by
caseIgnoreIA5Match through component matching. 2A versus 2B still has to be
addressed. On that score I prefer 2B as it makes more sense when taking the
limit.

     caseIgnoreIA5Match says "   foo" and "foo" are equal
     caseIgnoreIA5Match says "   fo"  and "fo" are equal
     caseIgnoreIA5Match says "   f"   and "f" are equal
                     2B says "   "    and "" are equal
                     2A says they're not - that seems odd to me!

Regards,
Steven


(Regardless of the choice LDAPprep can and should be designed
to be idempotent.)