|
Tow things:
1) Are you saying that the same logic should also apply to other search filters (not just the present filter)?
2) I'm missing the point about attribute subtyping. If a filter item considers attribute subtypes of the named attribute, and OID is still just as definitive isn't it? It either exists in the schema or it doesn't.
>>> Rici Lake <rici@ricilake.net> 5/19/05 12:46:08 PM >>>
On 18-May-05, at 10:49 PM, Jim Sermersheim wrote: > I don't think I agree with your assertion that it should work > differently depending on whether the numericoid versus the descr form > of the attribute type is used. If that distinction were made for > presence, shouldn't it also be made for other filter items as well? > For example, it seems you argue that (2.5.616.123=jdoe) could evaluate > to FALSE, while (bogusAttr=jdoe) would evaluate to UNDEFINED (where > both are not known to the server's schema). That makes sense to me, assuming that attributetype inheritance is not taken into account by the filter. Then the non-presence of an attribute type identified by numeric oid would be definitive, whereas the non-presence of an attribute type identified by an unknown descr would be non-definitive. |