[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: Q: "opjectClass: top" or not?
On Wed, 20 Nov 2013, Ulrich Windl wrote:
Sorry, this is a somewhat generic question: I wonder what difference it makes whether I specify "objectClass: top" for an object, or not: Conceptually, "top" is included automatically (so the objectClass attribute goes to any structural class), but when I fetch an object, I never see the "top" objectClass. Explicitly specifying "objectClass: top" makes every object a few bytes larger. So is there any reason to explicitly specify "objectClass: top"?
very interesting point.
I have a customer with an enterprise application that insists on having an explicit objectClass: top on all entries.
Their developers argue that the rfcs mandate an explicit objectClass: top on all entries. I argue that the wording in the respective rfcs is not exact enough. Having an objectClass that inherits from top should be enough from my point of view.
I am currently travelling and cannot lookup the rfc.
Christian Kratzer CK Software GmbH
Email: email@example.com Wildberger Weg 24/2
Phone: +49 7032 893 997 - 0 D-71126 Gaeufelden
Fax: +49 7032 893 997 - 9 HRB 245288, Amtsgericht Stuttgart
Web: http://www.cksoft.de/ Geschaeftsfuehrer: Christian Kratzer