Re: vacation message & schema design

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

Leif Johansson writes:
>> That would give us 11 or so object classes, one for each optional
>> feature in the mail system, just so we could use LDAP to store mail
>> information.  Most mail objects would need at least 5-6 object classes.
>> *Not* good.  I haven't seen many schemas that follow that philosophy
>> either.
> 
> Not only is it good schema design it is based on good OO design
> principles: Use interfaces (which is exactly what an aux object class
> is) and in the case of LDAP polymorphism to expose specific features
> to applications.

You must be disappointed with a lot of schemas out there, then.  E.g.
rfc2256 which has things like searchGuide, userPassword and seeAlso in
several structural classes instead of in an aux class, and it mixes
org/person names with locations with contact info, etc.

Anyway, which application_s_?  There are maybe three applications
involved: The mail system, the user interface to change one's own mail
settings, and the IMAP servers used to read mail - and they are all
configured or programmed to rely on the same schema.

> I don't believe you can show me a deployed schema which actually
> relies on empty IA5Strings.

I renamed this subthread because it no longer has anyting to do with
empty strings, only with schema design and whether to use an boolean
attribute vs. an object class.  But I can rename it back; see next
message.

-- 
Hallvard