Subject: RE: Models: Matching Rule Uses

From: "Jim Sermersheim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 17:21:03 -0700

Why not? I may have an attribute who's syntax is caseExactMatch. I may
want to search for values of that attribute using an extensible match
filter where the rule is caseIgnoreMatch.

Jim

>>> "Ramsay, Ron" <[email-masked]> 1/30/03 4:30:59 PM >>>
caseIgnoreMatch is not an *extensible* matching rule.

-----Original Message-----
From: Hallvard B Furuseth [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Friday, 31 January 2003 09:34
To: [email-masked] 
Subject: Models: Matching Rule Uses

[Models] says:

> 4.1.4. Matching Rule Uses
>
>  A matching rule use lists the attributes which are suitable for use
>  with an extensible matching rule

Please add something like "(in addition to those uses expressed in
AttributeType descriptions)".

BTW, how do Matching Rule Uses relate to the statements in [Syntaxes]
about which matching rules can be used with which syntaxes?
For example, [Syntaxes] 5.2.6 says:

>   The caseIgnoreMatch rule compares an assertion value of the
Directory
>   String syntax to an attribute value of a syntax (e.g. the
Directory
>   String, Printable String, Country String or Telephone Number
syntax)
>   whose corresponding ASN.1 type is DirectoryString or one of its
>   alternative string types, e.g. PrintableString.

-- 
Hallvard

---

From: "Steven Legg" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 15:31:22 +1100

Jim,

Jim Sermersheim wrote:
> Why not?

No reason why not. X.500 doesn't restrict what matching rules can be used
in an extensible match. Directory administrators may be able to, depending
on how one interprets the matchingRuleUse attribute.

Regards,
Steven

> I may have an attribute who's syntax is caseExactMatch. I may