Re: [ldapext] UTF-8 full support in LDIF / LDIF v2

[Yves Dorfsman <yves@zioup.com>]

Steven Legg wrote:

> > > > > See http://www.xmled.info/drafts/draft-sciberras-xed-eldif-05.txt

I did look at it, personally I find it difficult for humans, for diff'ing 
etc... XML has its place, but so does pure text.


> > Yes I was wondering about that, do we need multi-line values as work 
> > around because schemas aren't precise enough ?
>
> No, we need them because sheets of paper, computer screens and RFCs are
> not infinitely wide. :-) Human-readability, line breaks and indenting tend
> to go hand-in-hand.


I've been thinking about this and trying a few things. My conclusion is that 
the best solution would be the good old here document.

objectclass: inetOrgPerson
organizationName:<<EOT
The two line
  company
EOT
sn: Jensen



With the following specifications:
Any of the following characters (or sequence in the case of CR+LF) can be 
used as a separator (<SEP>):

LF (U+000A), CR (U+000D), CR+LF (U+000D followed by U+000A), NEL (U+0085), 
FF (U+000C), LS (U+2028), PS U+2029)

Any sequence of characters can be used instead of EOT, but cannot include a 
separator character. The same sequence has to be used at the begining and 
the end.

Any UTF-8 character, except separators, can be used on each line.

Any separator can be used to separate the lines.

The text start after EOT<SEP>, and finishes with the last character before 
<SEP>EOT. The organization name in the example above is exactly two lines, 
the last separator is not part of the text.

No need or possibility to escape characters, no possibility of folding lines  .



--
Yves.
http://www.sollers.ca/

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