> > Yes - I'm on the list now - I joined yesterday afternoon. :-) Welcome ! I hope that Sun LDAP developpers will stay at sun long enouh to complete this API definition (I just read that Jean-François Arcand will leave Sun on dec. 4th... What a loss :/ ). Anyways, that's life ...
> > I agree with Ludo's comment above regarding naming. Something we've been > trying to do is to follow the RFC naming as much as possible as well as > following Java naming conventions. Sometimes there is a choice of name to > use (e.g. LDAPDN from RFC4511 which looks ugly all uppercase, or DN from > RFC4512 which looks silly in mixed case but good in uppercase). We've chosen > DN in this case for simply for reasons of familiarity: most people refer to > distinguish names as DNs - not LDAP DNs. This is a road I also walk : all the messages definition in ADS are closely defined following the RFCs, even if it sounds silly sometime (Object instead of DN, etc...) I proposed Dn just because it was a mix between something easy to use (better than LdapDN : whatever, is there any DN outside of the LDAP world ? ;), and because of the Sun JAVA naming convention. But considering that it's a composite name (Distinguished Name), DN fits well too. Ok, let's stay with DN. RDN too, I guess. > I've also been cutting and pasting bits of the RFC text into the Javadoc > where possible and linking to it, so that people feel "closer" to the > standard. I think, if possible, we should take a similar approach in this > joint LDAP SDK effort, assuming that we are allowed to quote bits of RFC > since they are Copyrighted? Obviously the Javadoc would look pretty ugly if > we had to put "Copyright (C) The Internet Society" everywhere. Well, if quoted correctly, this is not an isssue. I guess that a mention of the copyright in a notice.txt should be fine. -- Regards, Cordialement, Emmanuel Lécharny www.iktek.com
