On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 11:15 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > Craig White wrote: > > > His confusion is very common...I admit that I too was confused by that > > very notion when I first started mucking with LDAP. One would think that > > if you use say OpenOffice to save say Test.DOC that Microsoft Word > > should be able to open that file [1]. Likewise, since LDIF is the world > > of LDAP, shouldn't one expect that an LDIF file exported by Kontact be > > usable with openldap? > > Is there some reason that there isn't a standard schema shipped with the > server that supplies what the clients in the distribution expect? ---- If I understand your term 'clients' to mean an address book client like Kontact, I would venture to guess that Kontact like Evolution and all other address book clients each has their own schema. If you are decrying that all of the various address book clients all have differing notions about schema's, then you should take that up with them. Most, if not all LDAP implementations include an inetOrgPerson schema that is consistent because this is part of an RFC. Each of the address book clients that I have looked at, use attributes that go beyond the inetOrgPerson schema and that is what is really being discussed. Now if you are referring to something other than address book 'clients', then you will have to be more specific. Craig -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
