Re: Reguested Schema data

[Clif H. <cl...@di...>]

Chris,

I sent Graham a new Schema.pm file last Friday night that addresses
the problems I was seeing with missing data and the 
attribute/objectclass naming situation.

Graham is reviewing my changes.

Later,

Clif


> 
> Graham Barr <gb...@po...> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 09:50:04PM -0600, Clif Harden wrote:
> >> Graham,  
> >> 
> >> I have attached 2 files that contain data about the schema 
> >> problem.  
> >> 
> >> ldap.oids.gz contains oids that do not return data.  
> >> 
> >> ldap.schema.gz is a complete schema from one of my test 
> >> netscape directory servers.  
> > 
> > Thanks.
> > 
> >> If possible, possibly now or in the future, I would like to 
> >> see us do away with changing the case of the oids and names. 
> >> I have not had a chance to see how hard this would be.  
> > 
> > You cannot. Attribute names etc are not case sensetive. So the module
> > must ignore case when doing a lookup for the name supplied.
> > 
> > Graham.
> 
> Correct, however Clif also adds:
> 
> >> away with creating multi-valued oid strings.  On one of my servers I
> >> have an objectclass named mhsMessagingStore and an attribute aliased as
> >> MHSMessagingStore, when we lower case the names and aliases in this case
> >> we create the same name pointing to 2 different
> >> oids.
> 
> This means that we need multiple oid 'namespaces', as Clif has two OIDs -
> one an objectclass and one an attribute - with the same name.
> 
> We currently have a single %oid object per Schema object, so we could do
> something like prefix each oid string with "at" or "oc". I'm not sure if
> that's the best solution, or if this would cause other problems. (For
> example, what would you do with values for an attribute that has an OID
> syntax - would the values be 'at' or 'oc' OIDs?)
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Chris
> 
>