[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: Default Pretty Form of DNs

> At 09:39 AM 2001-12-22, Michael Ströder wrote:
> >"Kurt D. Zeilenga" wrote:
> >> 
> >> I recommend the default pretty form be the strict RFC 2253 (bis)
> >> with minimal escaping.  That is, only characters which require
> >> escaping are escaped.  If clients desire further escaping before
> >> presenting the DN to the user, that's there responsibility.
> >> 
> >> Comments?
> >
> >Minimal escaping seems to me the best form of a DN to present to the
> >user. I can't imagine a case where further escaping is more readable
> >for a human being. Except quoted names are most times more readable
> >for humans.
> RFC2253 doesn't have a quoted form...

Pretty DN will of course comply with RFC2253 which does not allow
any quoted string; I'd say that the current HEAD implementation
of DN parsing (which is a completely different business from DN
"pretty"ing) is quite liberal, in that RFC2253, RFC1179 DCE DNs
are allowed. The resulting structural representation is turned
back in string form and "pretty"ed according to RFC2253.

The only extra escaping that is currently implemented refers
to DN normalization; basically commas (',') and plusses ('+') 
are escaped to facilitate ACL and similia (to avoid handling
paranoid cases of rdn splitting at escaped commas, as currently 
done in HEAD code).  Of course this is experimental and can be 
easily trimmed by adding/removing chars from the appropriate 
macro, LDAP_DN_WILLESCAPE_CHAR(), currently defined 
in libraries/libldap/getdn.c