Re: User-defined attribute options (Was: Suggestion: attribute;search)

[Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no>]

Kurt D. Zeilenga writes:
>>> Code wise, they could implemented simply by changing ad.c:
>>>         (...)
> 
> I'm now thinking that instead of having an extensible array
> of option tag/range prefixes.  The default would be "lang-".
> This could be extended by a configuration directive to support
> other hierarchically tags.  For a (contrived) example,
> "e-geopolitical-" could allow:  telephone;e-geopolitical-us-ca-sf
> (City and County of San Franscisco, State of California, United
> States) vs. telephone;e-geopolitical-us-ca-sm-rwc (Redwood City,
> County of San Mateo, State of California, United States).

I don't quite follow this.  Do you mean that slapd.conf would
configure a list of prefixes (in this case just "e-geopolitical-")
which would work the same way as "lang-"?

>>> That is, these options are just like language options, they
>>> are both "tagging" options.  The code should treat them the
>>> same.
>>
>>I suppose so, but isn't the language code rather slow?
> 
> Maybe.  The code may be doing more.

Yes, it supports ranges too, and an unlimited number of tags.
I don't know if we need that for user-defined options, though.

-- 
Hallvard