Subject: Re: Default encoding (Was: Binary Syntax and the binary AttributeType option)

From: "Jim Sermersheim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:01:26 -0700

>>> "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]> 1/21/01 9:07:14 PM >>>

>If we require all implementations to support a particular
>encoding, there is no need to "MUST" or "SHOULD" another
>encoding.  I don't see any point in a specific "MAY" as
>implementations generally MAY be liberal in what accept.
>Likewise, one could argue that "MUST NOT" or "SHOULD NOT"
>are not needed.

This only works if it's interpreted as "all implementations MUST support a syntaxes default encoding". Not as I initially interpreted it: "all implementations MUST support the XXX encoding".

>I believe we should consider adding to the specification
>statements which say:
> 1) each syntax has a default encoding which is to be
>    used unless the client requests an alternative encoding, and

Yes

> 2) a syntax's default encoding is its string encoding unless
>    stated otherwise.

Yes

Jim