So what's the motivation? To make it sound more like a LDAP? Can there be anything that would not be validated with OSSC?
Does OSSC cover any textual and binary values? If you think it's a catch all which is more appropriate we can do it, why not. On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 13:13, Emmanuel Lecharny <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi, > > we have a AcceptAllSyntaxChecker which is associated to any syntax without > any defined syntaxChecker. It's a catch all. I suggest we remove it and > replace it with OctetStringSyntaxChecker, which is also a catch all. > > thoughts ? > > -- > -- > cordialement, regards, > Emmanuel Lécharny > www.iktek.com > directory.apache.org > > > -- Ersin ER http://www.ersiner.net
