directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Seelmann <>
Subject Re: [Shared] Relaxing the schema parsers
Date Sun, 01 Jun 2008 08:16:12 GMT
Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:

> AFAIR, those grammars are also different because they create different
> kind of object (to be double checked). Anyway, this is not a reason to
> not merge those two grammars.

Yes, you are right. In a first step lets convert between these different
objects, perhapse later we could remove one of these classes.

> I would like to add some more features, like accepting a name for
> syntaxes. Nothing is less painfull than to have an OID to express that
> an AttributeType is a IA5String !

Do you mean just to accept the name field in syntax descriptions like

  ( DESC 'IA5 String' )
  ( NAME 'IA5String' DESC 'IA5 String' )

Or also to accept this name in attribute types like

  ( ... NAME 'mail' ... SYNTAX )
  ( ... NAME 'mail' ... SYNTAX IA5String )

In the latter case, should the schema parser take care of mapping this
name to an OID? I guess this is not possible because the parser can't
access the schema registry, so it must be done inside the server.

>> 3rd)
>> Add an "isStrict" flag to schema.g which is true by default.
> IMHO, the grammar parser should not be strict by default, but relaxed.
> If you set it to strict, many users will ask 'why is my schema not
> correct ?'



View raw message