Re: draft-ietf-ldapbis-syntaxes-02: oid = descr / numericoid

["Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>]

I note that these productions has been moved to
draft-ietf-ldapbis-models, Section 1.3 (Common
Productions).   ldapbis-models also contains
a section, 6.2, which briefly discusses
"Short Names".  Please review.

Kurt


At 06:44 AM 2002-09-01, Michael Ströder wrote:
>HI!
>
>I'd like to propose a change to draft-ietf-ldapbis-syntaxes-02 since I noticed some problems with same OID textual descriptions being used for object classes and attribute types.
>
>Current text:
>
>------------------------------ snip ----------------------------
>   When 'oid' elements occur in a value, the 'descr' notation option
>   SHOULD be used in preference to the 'numericoid'.  An object
>   descriptor is more readable than a numeric OBJECT IDENTIFIER, and a
>   descriptor (where assigned and known by the implementation) SHOULD
>   be used in preference to numeric oids to the greatest extent
>   possible.  Examples of object descriptors in LDAP are attribute
>   type, object class, and matching rule names.
>
>      oid = descr / numericoid
>
>------------------------------ snip ----------------------------
>
>IMHO the other way round is better since it causes less grief on side of a schema-aware application:
>
>   When 'oid' elements occur in a value, the 'numericoid' notation
>   option SHOULD be used in preference to the 'descr'. An object
>   descriptor might be ambigously used
>   to specify an attribute type, an object class or a matching rule
>   name.
>
>Please excuse my poor English.
>
>Ciao, Michael.