nadf.schema

开放源码的ldap系统

# $OpenLDAP: pkg/ldap/servers/slapd/schema/nadf.schema,v 1.2.8.5 2001/02/03 03:46:42 kurt Exp $

# These are definitions from the North American Directory Forum
# They were taken from ftp://ftp.gte.com/pub/nadf/nadf-docs/sd-04.ps
# Our thanks to Harald T. Alvestrand that provided the pointer.

# This is a preliminary version and is likely to be incorrect in
# a number of areas

# The root for OIDs is joint-iso-ccitt mhs-motis(6) group(6) grimstad(5)
# nadf(2).  In othor words, barring any error, 2.6.6.5.2.  Then,
# nadfOink ::= 2.6.6.5.2.0
# nadfModule ::= 2.6.6.5.2.1
# nadfAttributeType ::= 2.6.6.5.2.4
# nadfObjectClass ::= 2.6.6.5.2.6

# Attribute Type Definition

# The spec says "leading zero is significant".  Is this really a
# numeric string?

attributetype ( 2.6.6.5.2.4.1 NAME 'fipsStateNumericCode'
	EQUALITY numericStringMatch
	SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.36{2} )

# It is probably inconvenient to give this attribute that syntax
# (Printable String) instead of Directory String.

attributetype ( 2.6.6.5.2.4.2 NAME 'fipsStateAlphaCode'
	EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch
	SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.44{2} )

# The spec says "leading zeros are significant".  Is this really a
# numeric string?

attributetype ( 2.6.6.5.2.4.3 NAME 'fipsCountyNumericCode'
	EQUALITY numericStringMatch
	SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.36{5} )

# It seems that fips55 is fipsPlaceNumericCode, is this so?

# The spec says "leading zeros are significant".  Is this really a
# numeric string?

attributetype ( 2.6.6.5.2.4.4 NAME ( 'fipsPlaceNumericCode' 'fips55' )
	EQUALITY numericStringMatch
	SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.36{5} )

attributetype ( 2.6.6.5.2.4.5 NAME 'ansiOrgNumericCode'
	EQUALITY integerMatch
	SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.27 )

# Apparently, 'ad' is an alias for 'addmdName'

attributetype ( 2.6.6.5.2.4.6 NAME ( 'addmdName' 'ad' )
	EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch
	SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )

# I don't know what syntax to give this.  I will use binary for the
# time being.

attributetype ( 2.6.6.5.2.4.7 NAME 'nadfSearchGuide'
	SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.5 )

attributetype ( 2.6.6.5.2.4.8 NAME 'supplementaryInformation'
	EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch
	SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15{76} )

attributetype ( 2.6.6.5.2.4.9 NAME 'namingLink'
	SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12 )

attributetype ( 2.6.6.5.2.4.10 NAME 'reciprocalNamingLink'
	SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.12
	SINGLE-VALUE )

# Numbers 11 to 14 are obsolete

# Next one is unused.  BTW, this attribute is supposed to be
# case-exact match, but we cannot make that match unless we
# define the string with IA5 syntax and we don't have a
# clear base for this.

attributetype ( 2.6.6.5.2.4.15 NAME 'logicalDSAReference'
	EQUALITY caseIgnoreMatch
	SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.15 )

attributetype ( 2.6.6.5.2.4.16 NAME 'multiMediaInformation'
	SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.5 )

# Number 17, 18 and 19 are EDI-related attributes for the nadfEDIUser
# class that we did not have and has been left out below.

# Object classes

# According to the intended use described in section 3.3.1 in the spec,
# this can only be ABSTRACT.
# We had lastModifiedTime as 'allows', but sd-04 has it as MUST.
# We did not have multiMediaInformation neither on this class nor
# on any of its derived classes.

objectclass ( 2.6.6.5.2.6.7 NAME 'nadfObject' SUP top ABSTRACT
	MUST lastModifiedTime
	MAY ( multiMediaInformation $ nadfSearchGuide $
	supplementaryInformation ) )

# I think all classes derived from locality should be considered
# STRUCTURAL, since locality is.

objectclass ( 2.6.6.5.2.6.1 NAME 'usStateOrEquivalent'
	SUP ( locality $ nadfObject ) STRUCTURAL
	MUST ( l $ fipsStateNumericCode $ fipsStateAlphaCode $ st ) )

objectclass ( 2.6.6.5.2.6.2 NAME 'usPlace'
	SUP ( locality $ nadfObject ) STRUCTURAL
	MUST ( l $ fipsPlaceNumericCode ) )

objectclass ( 2.6.6.5.2.6.3 NAME 'usCountyOrEquivalent' SUP usPlace STRUCTURAL
	MUST fipsCountyNumericCode )

# applicationEntity is STRUCTURAL, so we will declare this one the same

objectclass ( 2.6.6.5.2.6.5 NAME 'nadfApplicationEntity'
	SUP applicationEntity STRUCTURAL
	MUST supportedApplicationContext )

# Following our heuristic, this one will be STRUCTURAL since organization
# is too.  We did not have 'o' as 'requires', but if this is really a
# subclass of organization, then 'o' becomes MUST by inheritance

objectclass ( 2.6.6.5.2.6.6 NAME 'nadfADDMD'
	SUP ( organization $ nadfObject ) STRUCTURAL
	MUST addmdName )

# Number 7 is nadfObject described above.

# This one quacks like an AUXILIARY object class

objectclass ( 2.6.6.5.2.6.8 NAME 'publicObject' SUP top AUXILIARY
	MUST namingLink )

# And so does this one

objectclass ( 2.6.6.5.2.6.9 NAME 'providerObject' SUP top AUXILIARY
	MUST reciprocalNamingLink )

# The spec says number 10 is obsolete

# This one also strongly smells like AUXILIARY

objectclass ( 2.6.6.5.2.6.11 NAME 'fips55Object' SUP top AUXILIARY
	MUST fipsPlaceNumericCode
	MAY st )

# The spec says numbers 12 to 18 are obsolete

# Another obviously AUXILIARY class

objectclass ( 2.6.6.5.2.6.19 NAME 'nationalObject' SUP top AUXILIARY
	MUST c )

# So is this one

objectclass ( 2.6.6.5.2.6.20 NAME 'ansiOrgObject' SUP top AUXILIARY
	MUST ansiOrgNumericCode )

# We did not have the next one, but it is innocuous

objectclass ( 2.6.6.5.2.6.21 NAME 'caProvinceOrTerritory'
	SUP ( locality $ nadfObject ) STRUCTURAL
	MUST st )

# According to the spec, numbers 22, 23 and 24 are obsolete

# Number 25 was nadfEDIuser as a subclass of edi-user.  Sorry we cannot
# deal with this one and we did not have it anyway.