Re: UTF-8 full support in LDIF / LDIF v2
Michael Ströder <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ldapext |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Yves Dorfsman wrote: > > Looking back (way back) at this thread, I am not the only one seeing > value here: > > Michael Ströder wrote: >>>> I'm not convinced that removing the ASCII restrictions will be a good >>>> thing. Not only do I doubt it will have a net positive on >>>> displayability of LDIF for those who have a displayability goal (I >>>> don't this goal), I think it will have a net negative impact on >>>> interoperability and user confusion, such as when the user creates a >>>> file using one Unicode normalization algorithm, but is trying to set >>>> values which require a different Unicode normalization value. >>> How so ? In the current version, you have to encode your Unicode to >>> UTF-8, and then encode it again to base64. With my proposal, you would >>> get the exact same UTF-8 strings as you do today, but they would not be >>> (or would not have to be) encoded in base64. >> >> I agree with Yves here. Hmm, I agreed on SASL normalization not being an issue. But you skipped my strong disagreement about your LDIF diffing use-case. Excerpt from http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ldapext/current/msg01759.html > Michael Ströder wrote: >> Yves Dorfsman wrote: >>> Kurt Zeilenga wrote: >>>> Adding UTF-8 support does appear to be in support of improving LDIF as >>>> a proper interchange format. It seems to be driven by other goals, >>>> such as trying to make LDIF files displayable. >>> Yes and no. My main reason for pushing this is diffing. You run into a >>> problem and you want to diff the original and the problematic LDIF >>> export of your directory. >> >> Sorry, but this is a very bad use-case. Given the fact that there are >> decent LDIF modules for various programming languages you can implement >> a robust delta-generation of LDIF data. Doing that with line-oriented >> text tools is bad practice anyway! Ciao, Michael. _______________________________________________ Ldapext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ldapext