Subject: rfc2277 compliance

From: Hallvard B Furuseth <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 18:13:44 +0100

rfc2277 (IETF Policy on Character Sets and Languages) says:

> 2.  Where to do internationalization
> (...)
>   Where protocol
>   elements look like text tokens, such as in many IETF application
>   layer protocols, protocols MUST specify which parts are protocol and
>   which are text. [WR 2.2.1.1]

Which means [Syntaxes] should specify which syntaxes contain text and
which ones do not.

> 4.2.  Requirement for language tagging
>
>   Protocols that transfer text MUST provide for carrying information
>   about the language of that text.

This implies that LDAP needs something like an Accept-Language extended
operation similar to the HTTP Accept-Language: header.  It would specify
which languages the client prefers for LDAPResult.diagnosticMessage and
text in unsolicited notifications.

-- 
Hallvard

---

From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:35:33 -0600

>Which means [Syntaxes] should specify which syntaxes contain text and

The specification (as a whole) should be reasonably clear as to whether
a protocol element is character data or not.   We need not, however,
state the obvious.  That is, I don't think we need to add "values of
the Directory String syntax are character data".  However, if there
are cases where you believe the specification is not clear as to whether
values of a syntax are character data or not, please note so to the list.

>operation similar to the HTTP Accept-Language: header.
>It would specify which languages the client prefers for LDAPResult.diagnosticMessage and

While not a complete solution, LDAP addresses this through language tags
options (RFC 2596).  Additionally, servers can use other information
(such as associated with authenticated users) to localize such text.

While certainly one could develop an extension to address this issue,
and I would encourage those interested to propose such an extension
to the IETF, I think LDAPBIS should view such as a new feature and
hence beyond our scope.

Kurt

---

From: Hallvard B Furuseth <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:24:59 +0100

I should have stated that I'm not really concerned with how much we do
for RFC2277 compliance myself.  I just thought from the passwords/
SASLprep thread that at least you & Jim might be.  Anyway,

> values of a syntax are character data or not, please note so to the list.

It's not clear to me if all syntaxes in [Syntaxes] except JPEG contain
text in the rfc2277 sense, or if just the ones matching the string
matching rules listed in [Syntaxes] 4.2 are text.

>> It would specify which languages the client prefers for
>> LDAPResult.diagnosticMessage and text in unsolicited notifications.
> 
> options (RFC 2596).

I know.  That's why I just mentioned elements that can not be associated
with language tags.

> Additionally, servers can use other information

Check if that his entry has something like a preferredLanguage
attribute, you mean?  OK, but it doesn't help other users, or
unauthenticated users.

> to the IETF, I think LDAPBIS should view such as a new feature and

Fine by me.  (And I don't think it will be me who proposes it.)

-- 
Hallvard