Ahh ok you're right I did not consider the confusion with alias entries that could result.
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 10:22 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny <[email protected]>wrote: > Stefan Seelmann wrote: > >> Alex Karasulu wrote: >> >> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> >> >> >From RFC 4512: >> The NAME field provides a set of short names (descriptors) that are >> to be used as aliases for the OID. >> >> So there are at least three synonyms for the same thing. >> >> I'd use the terms defined in the ABNF and that is 'NAME'. Otherwise also >> many other methods could be renamed (e.g. getMayAttributeTypes could be >> named getAllowedAttributeTypes or getOptionalAttributeTypes). >> >> > +1. I think that sticking to the RFC names eliminate the confusion. Aliases > are something different in LDAP terminology. In this very case, the RFC call > those NAME aliases, but the Description uses NAME, not ALIAS. > >> My 2 cents, >> Stefan >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > -- > cordialement, regards, > Emmanuel Lécharny > www.iktek.com > directory.apache.org > > > -- Alex Karasulu My Blog :: http://www.jroller.com/akarasulu/ Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org Apache MINA :: http://mina.apache.org
