DUBUISSON Olivier wrote:
>
> "Egon Andersen, Talura" wrote:
> >
> > Paul Long wrote:
> > >
> > > >From the syntax in X.680, it looks like these are illegal
> constructs:
> > >
> > > CHOICE { }
> > > CHOICE { ... }
> > > CHOICE { ..., x X }
> > >
> > > IOW, there must be at least one alternative in the extension root.
> Is that
> > > true?
> > >
> > > Paul Long
> > > ipDialog, Inc.
> >
> > ChoiceType always starts with RootAlternativeTypeList, which is never
> > empty, so all three constructs above are invalid.
> > You will probably not get in jail for it, so 'illegal' may not be the
> > correct term here :-)
>
> This is the term we use is in the ASN.1 group... even though the
> difference between 'legal' and 'illegal' is not easy to *hear*!
> --
I know this is the terms (normally) used in the ASN.1 recommendations,
but that still does not make the police knock on my door, when someone
breakes the rules!
The terms 'valid' and 'invalid' would actually be more appropriate than
'legal' and illegal' - also in the recommendations!
(Not that I really expect anyone to make such a replacement in the
recommendations.)
/Egon
--
* Talura ApS * Phone: +45 43 52 50 00 *
* Baldersh�j 24 B * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* DK-2635 Ish�j * http://www.talura.dk *
