Alexandre,
Le Tuesday 18 May 2004 07:18, Steven Legg a écrit :
Ramsay, Ron wrote:
Why isn't this covered by the old matching rules? The X.500 standard
> caseIgnoreMatch applies to UTF-8 and matches case (though they may not > have defined the meaning of space?).
These matching rules strip out diacriticals before performing the case ignore match, which is something the existing case ignore matching rules don't do.
The names of these matching rules are clearly causing confusion. A better name for caseIgnoreNonasciiMatch, for example, would be something like caseIgnoreCanonicalLatinMatch or caseIgnoreBasicLatinMatch.
Hi,
you're right, the name of those matching rules isn't clear, I'm french, so my work is focused on Latin characters, but may be this could be useful for other kind of characters, I don't know, that's why I choose to ignore all non-ascii characters instead of only latin's ones.
Do you think this could only work on latin characters ?
I don't know enough about non-Latin scripts to answer one way or the other. So from a position of ignorance, I suggest that you choose a name that reflects what the matching rule is about, to the extent that you have defined it. If some later specification updates the matching rule to apply canonicalization to non-Latin scripts then that specification can always define an additional name that reflects the rule's wider applicability. Matching rules are permitted to have more than one name.
Regards, Steven
Thanks for your comment.
Alexandre.
_______________________________________________ Ldapext mailing list Ldapext@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext