Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

grouper-users - Re: [grouper-users] v1.1 comments

Subject: Grouper Users - Open Discussion List

List archive

Re: [grouper-users] v1.1 comments

Chronological Thread 
  • From: "blair christensen." <>
  • To:
  • Subject: Re: [grouper-users] v1.1 comments
  • Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 08:32:35 -0600
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=FsIgAGCka+lVTE9vUnxFrcOVkgnmHZX4mF1IeJ0XgVqrUBK3dj3EhVs4ikU6Mxp8rINSvi77P0t8nUhVM6AfTFWKhMoBceu5QF5VjiFLObooo1YuIroX7H61l6M8tpo9v5Tc4nun8Uycf9z+aFOqEhb3tWKgY4EyHfdaM7SYW28=

On 1/23/07, Tom Barton
Jim Fox wrote:
> The two values "subject id" and "subject name" are the
> source of some confusion.

Agree. Although we'll probably need to revisit the proposed Subject v1.0
spec, at least briefly, before acting on it, we'll probably remove the
distinguished attributes of "name" and "description", leaving just "id",
plus whatever attributes are returned by the ldap query configured in

I'm definitely in favor of this change. The
id/identifier/name/description mishmash has been a source of

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page