Re: Evaluation of an unknown attribute description in a presence filter

Tow things:
 
1) Are you saying that the same logic should also apply to other search filters (not just the present filter)?
 
2) I'm missing the point about attribute subtyping. If a filter item considers attribute subtypes of the named attribute, and OID is still just as definitive isn't it? It either exists in the schema or it doesn't.
 
>>> Rici Lake <[email protected]> 5/19/05 12:46:08 PM >>>

On 18-May-05, at 10:49 PM, Jim Sermersheim wrote:

> I don't think I agree with your assertion that it should work 
> differently depending on whether the numericoid versus the descr form 
> of the attribute type is used. If that distinction were made for 
> presence, shouldn't it also be made for other filter items as well? 
> For example, it seems you argue that (2.5.616.123=jdoe) could evaluate 
> to FALSE, while (bogusAttr=jdoe) would evaluate to UNDEFINED (where 
> both are not known to the server's schema).

That makes sense to me, assuming that attributetype inheritance is not 
taken into account by the filter. Then the non-presence of an attribute 
type identified by numeric oid would be definitive, whereas the 
non-presence of an attribute type identified by an unknown descr would 
be non-definitive.