syntaxes-10 notes
Hallvard B Furuseth <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ldapbis |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Syntaxes-10 has this new text in > 3.3.13. Generalized Time > The above ABNF allows character strings which do not represent valid > dates (in the Gregorian calendar) and/or valid times (e.g., February > 31, 1994). Such character strings SHOULD be considered invalid for > this syntax. I just realized that dates predating the Gregorian calendar are not Gregorian, so the above can be read as implying pre-Gregorian dates SHOULD be considered invalid. Was that intentional? And if not, is it worth worrying about? If so it might be simplest to just drop "(in the Gregorian calendar)" after all. > 4.1. General Considerations > Servers MAY implement the wordMatch and keywordMatch matching rules, > but SHOULD implement the other matching rules in Section 4.2. I would s/but/and/. > Appendix B. Changes from RFC 2252 The appendix should mention that uniqueMemberMatch now differs significantly from the X.500 variant. -- Hallvard