Notice: this Wiki will be going read only early in 2024 and edits will no longer be possible. Please see: https://gitlab.eclipse.org/eclipsefdn/helpdesk/-/wikis/Wiki-shutdown-plan for the plan.
Difference between revisions of "LDAP Issues and To-Dos"
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | {{#eclipseproject:technology.higgins|eclipse_custom_style.css}} | ||
Here's the updated list of issues and todo's on our LDAP schema representation in OWL work: | Here's the updated list of issues and todo's on our LDAP schema representation in OWL work: | ||
| − | #Class Definitions | + | #[http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4512#section-4.1.1 Class Definitions] |
##Handling for "ABSTRACT", "AUXILIARY", and "OBSOLETE" class definitions. | ##Handling for "ABSTRACT", "AUXILIARY", and "OBSOLETE" class definitions. | ||
| − | #Attribute Definitions | + | ##Handling for 'oid' and 'oids' fields (short name as well as oid). |
| − | ##Handling for matching rule specification on attribute definitions. | + | #[http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4512#section-4.1.2 Attribute Definitions] |
| + | ##Handling for matching rule specification on attribute definitions (i.e. "EQUALITY" "ORDERING", and "SUBSTRINGS"). | ||
##Handling for other attribute definition terms like "COLLECTIVE", "NO-USER-MODIFICATION", "USAGE", and "OBSOLETE" attributes. | ##Handling for other attribute definition terms like "COLLECTIVE", "NO-USER-MODIFICATION", "USAGE", and "OBSOLETE" attributes. | ||
##Operational attribute rdfs:domain specification (part of USAGE handling). | ##Operational attribute rdfs:domain specification (part of USAGE handling). | ||
| − | #Syntax Definitions | + | ##Handling for 'oid' and 'oids' fields (short name as well as oid). |
| + | #[http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4512#section-4.1.5 Syntax Definitions] | ||
##Expand syntax map to include other well known syntaxes and vendor specific syntaxes. | ##Expand syntax map to include other well known syntaxes and vendor specific syntaxes. | ||
##Make syntax map part of configuration file. | ##Make syntax map part of configuration file. | ||
| − | #Matching Rules | + | #[http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4512#section-4.1.3 Matching Rules] |
| − | ##These are | + | ##These are applicable during searches as well as during modifications (in LDAP you can't have two equal attribute values on the same object). Hopefully the IdAS Filter can express what we need here, if we need anything besides the default matching rules to be applied. |
##I don't believe there is anything to gain in trying to represent these in OWL since they are LDAP specific and don't really apply intrinsically within OWL either. | ##I don't believe there is anything to gain in trying to represent these in OWL since they are LDAP specific and don't really apply intrinsically within OWL either. | ||
| − | # | + | #[http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4512#section-4.1.4 Matching Rule Uses], [http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4512#section-4.1.6 DIT Content Rules], [http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4512#section-4.1.7.1 DIT Structure Rules], [http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4512#section-4.1.7.2 Name Forms] |
##I'm not sure what we can or should do with these yet. Any suggestions? | ##I'm not sure what we can or should do with these yet. Any suggestions? | ||
##For "version 1" of our generator, we will not attempt to support any of these in our LDAP ontologies. | ##For "version 1" of our generator, we will not attempt to support any of these in our LDAP ontologies. | ||
| Line 20: | Line 23: | ||
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
| − | *[[Higgins | + | *[[Higgins]] |
| − | *[[ | + | *[[Data Model]] |
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:Higgins Data Model]] | ||
Latest revision as of 08:47, 16 December 2008
{{#eclipseproject:technology.higgins|eclipse_custom_style.css}} Here's the updated list of issues and todo's on our LDAP schema representation in OWL work:
- Class Definitions
- Handling for "ABSTRACT", "AUXILIARY", and "OBSOLETE" class definitions.
- Handling for 'oid' and 'oids' fields (short name as well as oid).
- Attribute Definitions
- Handling for matching rule specification on attribute definitions (i.e. "EQUALITY" "ORDERING", and "SUBSTRINGS").
- Handling for other attribute definition terms like "COLLECTIVE", "NO-USER-MODIFICATION", "USAGE", and "OBSOLETE" attributes.
- Operational attribute rdfs:domain specification (part of USAGE handling).
- Handling for 'oid' and 'oids' fields (short name as well as oid).
- Syntax Definitions
- Expand syntax map to include other well known syntaxes and vendor specific syntaxes.
- Make syntax map part of configuration file.
- Matching Rules
- These are applicable during searches as well as during modifications (in LDAP you can't have two equal attribute values on the same object). Hopefully the IdAS Filter can express what we need here, if we need anything besides the default matching rules to be applied.
- I don't believe there is anything to gain in trying to represent these in OWL since they are LDAP specific and don't really apply intrinsically within OWL either.
- Matching Rule Uses, DIT Content Rules, DIT Structure Rules, Name Forms
- I'm not sure what we can or should do with these yet. Any suggestions?
- For "version 1" of our generator, we will not attempt to support any of these in our LDAP ontologies.
- Schema differences between IETF Standards and rogues.
- See Mark's "OID and name uniqueness" e-mail and resulting thread [1]