[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: schema-08 notes
Kurt D. Zeilenga writes:
>At 04:12 PM 3/25/2005, Andrew Sciberras wrote:
>>Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
>>>schema-08 says:
>>>
>>>> 2.4 dc
>>>
>>> I think section this needs '(Source: RFC 2247)', since one needs to
>>> read that RFC to find an object class to put "dc" in. The RFC is
>>> mentioned elsewhere, but section 2.4 and 3.* is where readers who need
>>> such an object class will be looking.
>>> (Copied from message 'More schema-07 nits', 3 Jun 2004 which I don't see
>>> a reply to.)
>>> What's the criteria for getting a "(Source: ...)" anyway?
>>> Every other attribute without one can get (Source: X.520) except
>>> userPassword which is from X.509. Every object class, X.521.
>>
>> I'm thinking that the table in Section 1.4 should be all that is
>> required to indicate the source of definitions.
>> In which case I think I will remove the redundant (and in this case
>> inconsistent) (Source:...) information.
>
> I rather remove the table and instead add source information
> in the sections providing the LDAP syntax description.
The table is unfriendly now, but some text so it can be read without
checking against section numbers would fix that:
Sections Source Schema elements
================== ================== =========================
2.4 RFC 2247 [RFC2247] 'dc' attribute type
2.39 RFC 2798 [RFC2798] 'uid' attribute type
2.41 X.509 [X.509] 'userPassword' attr. type
Rest of 2.1 - 2.43 X.520 [X.520] Other attribute types
3.1 - 3.12 X.521 [X.521] Object classes
I could go for either having that only, or (Source: ...) only, or both.
--
Hallvard