Re: REVISED protocol review notes [LONG]

[Steven Legg <steven.legg@adacel.com.au>]

Jim,

Jim Sermersheim wrote:
> Actually my current plan is to define both:
>      Attribute ::= SEQUENCE {
>              type    AttributeDescription,
>              vals    SET SIZE (1..MAX) OF AttributeValue }
> and
>      PartialAttribute ::= SEQUENCE {
>              type    AttributeDescription,
>              vals    SET OF AttributeValue }
>
> and use them in the appropriate places.
>
> Does this sound reasonable?

Yes, but you could also do this:

    PartialAttribute ::= SEQUENCE {
        type    AttributeDescription,
        vals    SET OF AttributeValue }

    Attribute ::= PartialAttribute(WITH COMPONENTS {..., vals (SIZE(1..MAX))})

You could also in-line the right hand side of the Attribute assignment
statement everywhere Attribute is needed and then rename PartialAttribute
to just Attribute.

By the way, are you intending to put identifiers into each of
the SET OF and SEQUENCE OF notations ? I so, do you want me to
make some appropriate suggestions ?

Regards,
Steven

> Jim
>
>
> > > > "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org> 10/21/03 9:17:11 PM >>>
>
> At 08:01 PM 10/21/2003, Jim Sermersheim wrote:
>
> > > > > Kurt Zeilenga < Kurt@OpenLDAP.org > 10/7/03 3:48:43 PM >>>
> > > >
> > > > Attribute ::= SEQUENCE { 
> > > > type AttributeDescription, 
> > > > vals SET OF AttributeValue } 
> > > >
> > > > Each attribute value is distinct in the set (no duplicates). The
>
> set 
>
> > > > of attribute values is unordered. Implementations MUST NOT reply
>
> upon 
>
> > > > any apparent ordering being repeatable. 
> > >
> > > This type is never explicitly used in the protocol. 
> >
> > It is the type for ModifyRequest.changes.modification
>
>
> Okay... but I note that ModifyRequest.changes.modification is
> a partial attribute. I assume your other changes to clarify
> Attribute may be partial will lead to PartialAttributeList
> fading away.
>
> Kurt