Re: Last call on 'Named Subordinate References in LDAPDirectories'

[mcs@netscape.com (Mark C Smith)]

"Kurt D. Zeilenga" wrote:
> 
> At 06:53 PM 5/7/01, Mark C Smith wrote:
> >3) Section 7.2 (Target object considerations), 2nd paragraph: The way
> >this is worded is a little ambiguous.  Do we mean to say that the server
> >SHOULD trim the scope, filter, and attribute list from the URL before
> >returning it?
> 
> Yes.  The wording was meant to deal with search specific
> URL extensions.  However, I concur the wording is a little
> ambiguous and URL extensions are address by following
> sentences.  Hence, I suggest replacing the paragraph with:
> 
>   In cases where the URI to be returned is a LDAP URL, the server
>   SHOULD trim any present scope, filter, or attribute list from the
>   URI before returning it.  Critical extensions MUST NOT be trimmed
>   or modified.  Other parts MAY be modified or trimmed.

Looks good to me.  One nit: I would say "an LDAP URL" instead of "a LDAP
URL".

-- 
Mark Smith
Directory Product Development / iPlanet E-Commerce Solutions
My words are my own, not my employer's.            Got LDAP?