Re: More on DIT content rules

[Jonghyuk Choi <jongchoi@us.ibm.com>]

>I think the equivalent statements from X.501 are:
>
>----------
>If no DIT content rule is present for a structural object class, then
>entries of that class shall contain only the attributes
>permitted by the structural object class definition.
>
>An entry governed by a DIT content rule may, in addition to the 
structural
>object class of the DIT structure rule, be
>associated with a subset of the auxiliary object classes identified by 
the
>DIT content rule. This association is reflected in
>the entry's objectClass attribute.
>----------
>
>That does seem to say that if there is no DIT content rule, the entry
>cannot belong to any auxiliary object classes. And it does seem strange 
to
>me.

Yes. looks like X.501 requires a DIT content rule to be related with a 
structrual object class,
should an entry of the class be associated with any auxiliary object 
classes.
Is it the intention of the I-D to follow the X.501 model in this respect ?

------------------------
Jong Hyuk Choi
IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center - Enterprise Linux Group
P. O. Box 218, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
email: jongchoi@us.ibm.com
(phone) 914-945-3979    (fax) 914-945-4425   TL: 862-3979