Re: [ldapext] [Fwd: LDAP C API gripes]

[Kurt Zeilenga <Kurt.Zeilenga@Isode.com>]

On Feb 21, 2007, at 7:47 AM, Howard Chu wrote:

> Something else that comes to mind - the client library ought to be  
> schema-aware. This is something that was always a given in X.500  
> clients, but has never had any priority in LDAP clients. It might  
> be worthwhile to implement syntax validation in the library, to  
> catch bogus inputs before talking to any servers...

Yes.  A server is only going to return the most basic information about
the problem, if lucky, identify the particular value which is invalid.
A syntax validation library could identify what in that value was bad.
For instance, consider validation of a value of the uniqueMember
attribute.  A server might say value x is bad.  The library might
be able to say that the 1st AVA of the 2nd RDN of the DN component
is invalid.

Of course, this validation API should be optional.  In supporting
handheld devices, offloading validation to the server would be a
good thing.  Of course, a handheld device is probably better offloading
all of LDAP to a device service of some sort.

-- Kurt

_______________________________________________
Ldapext mailing list
Ldapext@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext