Hi guys, what about starting for real to work on this common API ? We have had many preliminary discussions, and also have done a common presentation with Ludovic 2 months ago. I was pretty busy since then, but right now, the urgency to get a clean API is getting higher.
We have already clarified what a common API should be about. I suggest we start by defining the names we want to use for the base objects. There are a few which are really genuine to ldap, namely, DN, RDN, AVA, Entry, Attribute, Modification, Control, LdapURL, AttributeType, DitContentRule, DitStructureRule, MatchingRule, MatchingRuleUse, NameForm, ObjectClass, Syntax, ResultCode, OID and CSN. i'm not sure I have listed all the base objects, so feel free to add those you think are missing. Also those names are not the final ones. The idea is to discuss about the exact names we will use. For instance, DN is not necessarily the most common form. Many APIs or implementations are using LdapDn or LdapDN. Assuming that the Java naming convention requires that the first letter only to be upcased, one can think that Dn or Rdn is a better name. Please feel free to give your opinion. <Emmanuel's option> DN : I would rather use Dn RDN : Same her, Rdn sounds better to me AVA : idem, Ava Entry : fine Attribute : fine, except that it collides with JNDI attributes, making the JNDI -> new API translation cumbersome. EntryAttribute ? Modification : Fine Control : Fine LdapURL : LdapUrl has my preference AttributeType : Fine DitContentRule : Fine DitStructureRule : Fine MatchingRule : Fine MatchingRuleUse : Fine NameForm : Fine ObjectClass : Fine Syntax : Fine, or LdapSyntax ResultCode : Fine OID: Oid for me CSN: Csn again, same reason -- -- cordialement, regards, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com directory.apache.org
