Subject: distinguishedName attribute type

From: Hallvard B Furuseth <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 18:08:40 +0100

schema-08 says:

> 2.7  distinguishedName
>
>    The distinguishedName attribute type is the attribute supertype from
>    which attribute types with DN syntax inherit, instead of containing
>    values which name the object itself.

[Syntaxes] 3.3.9 (DN) does not say that, and it would seem strange
to me if it did.  I expect the above text should refer to DN-valued
attribute types defined in the schema draft itself.  The DN-valued
attributes in [Models] do not have 'SUP distinguishedName'.

Though [Syntaxes] 3.3.9 could RECOMMEND that schema specs prefer
"SUP distinguishedName" over "SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12",
if that's what the above text wants to accomplish.

-- 
Hallvard

---

From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 09:45:30 -0800

>>    values which name the object itself.

I think the RFC 2256 wording was better...
   This attribute type is not used as the name of the object itself, but
   it is instead a base type from which attributes with DN syntax   
   inherit.

But s/attributes/some attributes/
or even s/attributes/some user attributes/

---

From: Hallvard B Furuseth <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 19:05:19 +0100

> or even s/attributes/some user attributes/

Aah, of course [Models] doesn't do it.  Yes, definitely "user
attributes".

Another variant: "from which user attributes with DN syntax can inherit".

Except, isn't [schema] right about saying "attribute types" rather than
"attributes"?

Also, the same error occurs in 2.18 (name):
   "The name attribute type is the attribute supertype from which
   attributes with the name syntax inherit."

-- 
Hallvard

---

From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 10:15:24 -0800

>Except, isn't [schema] right about saying "attribute types" rather than

Yes.