Re: RE: PCLS classes deprecated in PCELS

On Fri, Sep 12, 2003 at 11:56:51AM -0400, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
| I think that there really are two separate questions.
| 1) Should PCLS be completed as a standards track RFC?  As far as I know, 
| everyone agrees that the answer to that is yes.

I certainly hope so...

| 2) How should PCIMe be mapped to LDAP?  My concern is taht you and others 
| are holding that mapping up to a standard of PCLS compatibility that PCIMe 
| itself does not meet.  I may be mistaken, but I believe that the 
| differences between PCIMe and PCIM are such that it is at best extremely 
| difficult (and quite possibly impossible) to accurately map PCIMe to LDAP 
| in a fashion compatible with PCLS.  My feeling is that concerns about PCELS 
| should be in the context of support for PCIMe, not in the context of 
| support for PCIM without PCIMe.

When PCELS starts deprecating PCLS classes or changing the objectclass tree of
PCLS objects then its changing PCLS. That's why I've been asking for textual
words and having PCELS classes inherit from PCLS classes (rather than the
other was around), so that PCELS could be discussed in terms of PCIMe and
not PCIM as PCLS is left intact.

Ryan