1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
|
<pre>Network Working Group K. Zeilenga, Ed.
Request for Comments: 3866 OpenLDAP Foundation
Obsoletes: <a href="./rfc2596">2596</a> July 2004
Category: Standards Track
<span class="h1">Language Tags and Ranges in the</span>
<span class="h1">Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP)</span>
Status of this Memo
This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).
Abstract
It is often desirable to be able to indicate the natural language
associated with values held in a directory and to be able to query
the directory for values which fulfill the user's language needs.
This document details the use of Language Tags and Ranges in the
Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP).
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-1" href="#section-1">1</a>. Background and Intended Use</span>
The Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) [<a href="./rfc3377" title=""Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Technical Specification"">RFC3377</a>] provides a
means for clients to interrogate and modify information stored in a
distributed directory system. The information in the directory is
maintained as attributes of entries. Most of these attributes have
syntaxes which are human-readable strings, and it is desirable to be
able to indicate the natural language associated with attribute
values.
This document describes how language tags and ranges [<a href="./rfc3066" title=""Tags for the Identification of Languages"">RFC3066</a>] are
carried in LDAP and are to be interpreted by LDAP implementations.
All LDAP implementations MUST be prepared to accept language tags and
ranges.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp14">BCP 14</a> [<a href="./rfc2119" title=""Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"">RFC2119</a>].
<span class="grey">Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 1]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-2" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a> Language Tags and Ranges in LDAP July 2004</span>
This document replaces <a href="./rfc2596">RFC 2596</a>. <a href="#appendix-A">Appendix A</a> summaries changes made
since <a href="./rfc2596">RFC 2596</a>.
<a href="#appendix-B">Appendix B</a> discusses differences from X.500(1997) "contexts"
mechanism.
<a href="#appendix-A">Appendix A</a> and B are provided for informational purposes only.
The remainder of this section provides a summary of Language Tags,
Language Ranges, and Attribute Descriptions.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-1.1" href="#section-1.1">1.1</a>. Language Tags</span>
<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp47#section-2">Section 2 of BCP 47</a> [<a href="./rfc3066" title=""Tags for the Identification of Languages"">RFC3066</a>] describes the language tag format which
is used in LDAP. Briefly, it is a string of [<a href="#ref-ASCII">ASCII</a>] letters and
hyphens. Examples include "fr", "en-US" and "ja-JP". Language tags
are case insensitive. That is, the language tag "en-us" is the same
as "EN-US".
<a href="#section-2">Section 2</a> of this document details use of language tags in LDAP.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-1.2" href="#section-1.2">1.2</a>. Language Ranges</span>
<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp47#section-2.5">Section 2.5 of BCP 47</a> [<a href="./rfc3066" title=""Tags for the Identification of Languages"">RFC3066</a>] describes the language ranges.
Language ranges are used to specify sets of language tags.
A language range matches a language tag if it is exactly equal to the
tag, or if it is exactly equal to a prefix of the tag such that the
first character following the prefix is "-". That is, the language
range "de" matches the language tags "de" and "de-CH" but not "den".
The special language range "*" matches all language tags.
Due to attribute description option naming restrictions in LDAP, this
document defines a different language range syntax. However, the
semantics of language ranges in LDAP are consistent with <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp47">BCP 47</a>.
<a href="#section-3">Section 3</a> of this document details use of language ranges in LDAP.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-1.3" href="#section-1.3">1.3</a>. Attribute Descriptions</span>
This section provides an overview of attribute descriptions in LDAP.
LDAP attributes and attribute descriptions are defined in [<a href="./rfc2251" title=""Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3)"">RFC2251</a>].
An attribute consists of a type, a set of zero or more associated
tagging options, and a set of one or more values. The type and the
options are combined into the AttributeDescription.
<span class="grey">Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 2]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-3" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a> Language Tags and Ranges in LDAP July 2004</span>
AttributeDescriptions can also contain options which are not part of
the attribute, but indicate some other function (such as range
assertion or transfer encoding).
An AttributeDescription with one or more tagging options is a direct
subtype of each AttributeDescription of the same type with all but
one of the tagging options. If the AttributeDescription's type is a
direct subtype of some other type, then the AttributeDescription is
also a direct subtype of the AttributeDescription which consists of
the supertype and all of the tagging options. That is,
"CN;x-bar;x-foo" is a direct subtype of "CN;x-bar", "CN;x-foo", and
"name;x-bar;x-foo". Note that "CN" is a subtype of "name".
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-2" href="#section-2">2</a>. Use of Language Tags in LDAP</span>
This section describes how LDAP implementations MUST interpret
language tags in performing operations.
Servers which support storing attributes with language tag options in
the Directory Information Tree (DIT) SHOULD allow any attribute type
it recognizes that has the Directory String, IA5 String, or other
textual string syntaxes to have language tag options associated with
it. Servers MAY allow language options to be associated with other
attributes types.
Clients SHOULD NOT assume servers are capable of storing attributes
with language tags in the directory.
Implementations MUST NOT otherwise interpret the structure of the tag
when comparing two tags, and MUST treat them simply as strings of
characters. Implementations MUST allow any arbitrary string which
conforms to the syntax defined in <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp47">BCP 47</a> [<a href="./rfc3066" title=""Tags for the Identification of Languages"">RFC3066</a>] to be used as a
language tag.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-2.1" href="#section-2.1">2.1</a>. Language Tag Options</span>
A language tag option associates a natural language with values of an
attribute. An attribute description may contain multiple language
tag options. An entry may contain multiple attributes with same
attribute type but different combinations of language tag (and other)
options.
A language tag option conforms to the following ABNF [<a href="./rfc2234" title=""Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF"">RFC2234</a>]:
language-tag-option = "lang-" Language-Tag
<span class="grey">Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 3]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-4" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a> Language Tags and Ranges in LDAP July 2004</span>
where the Language-Tag production is as defined in <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp47">BCP 47</a> [<a href="./rfc3066" title=""Tags for the Identification of Languages"">RFC3066</a>].
This production and those it imports from [<a href="./rfc2234" title=""Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF"">RFC2234</a>] are provided here
for convenience:
Language-Tag = Primary-subtag *( "-" Subtag )
Primary-subtag = 1*8ALPHA
Subtag = 1*8(ALPHA / DIGIT)
ALPHA = %x41-5A / %x61-7A ; A-Z / a-z
DIGIT = %x30-39 ; 0-9
A language tag option is a tagging option. A language tag option has
no effect on the syntax of the attribute's values nor their transfer
encoding.
Examples of valid AttributeDescription:
givenName;lang-en-US
CN;lang-ja
SN;lang-de;lang-gem-PFL
O;lang-i-klingon;x-foobar
description;x-foobar
CN
Notes: The last two have no language tag options. The x-foobar
option is fictious and used for example purposes.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-2.2" href="#section-2.2">2.2</a>. Search Filter</span>
If language tag options are present in an AttributeDescription in an
assertion, then for each entry within scope, the values of each
attribute whose AttributeDescription consists of the same attribute
type or its subtypes and contains each of the presented (and possibly
other) options is to be matched.
Thus, for example, a filter of an equality match of type
"name;lang-en-US" and assertion value "Billy Ray", against the
following directory entry:
dn: SN=Ray,DC=example,DC=com
objectClass: person DOES NOT MATCH (wrong type)
objectClass: extensibleObject DOES NOT MATCH (wrong type)
name;lang-en-US: Billy Ray MATCHES
name;lang-en-US: Billy Bob DOES NOT MATCH (wrong value)
CN;lang-en-US: Billy Ray MATCHES
<span class="grey">Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 4]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-5" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a> Language Tags and Ranges in LDAP July 2004</span>
CN;lang-en-US;x-foobar: Billy Ray MATCHES
CN;lang-en;x-foobar: Billy Ray DOES NOT MATCH (differing lang-)
CN;x-foobar: Billy Ray DOES NOT MATCH (no lang-)
name: Billy Ray DOES NOT MATCH (no lang-)
SN;lang-en-GB;lang-en-US: Billy Ray MATCHES
SN: Ray DOES NOT MATCH (no lang-,
wrong value)
Note that "CN" and "SN" are subtypes of "name".
It is noted that providing a language tag option in a search filter
AttributeDescription will filter out desirable values where the tag
does not match exactly. For example, the filter (name;lang-en=Billy
Ray) does NOT match the attribute "name;lang-en-US: Billy Ray".
If the server does not support storing attributes with language tag
options in the DIT, then any assertion which includes a language tag
option will not match as such it is an unrecognized attribute type.
No error would be returned because of this; a presence assertion
would evaluate to FALSE and all other assertions to Undefined.
If no options are specified in the assertion, then only the base
attribute type and the assertion value need match the value in the
directory.
Thus, for example, a filter of an equality match of type "name" and
assertion value "Billy Ray", against the following directory entry:
dn: SN=Ray,DC=example,DC=com
objectClass: person DOES NOT MATCH (wrong type)
objectClass: extensibleObject DOES NOT MATCH (wrong type)
name;lang-en-US: Billy Ray MATCHES
name;lang-en-US: Billy Bob DOES NOT MATCH (wrong value)
CN;lang-en-US;x-foobar: Billy Ray MATCHES
CN;lang-en;x-foobar: Billy Ray MATCHES
CN;x-foobar: Billy Ray MATCHES
name: Billy Ray MATCHES
SN;lang-en-GB;lang-en-US: Billy Ray MATCHES
SN: Ray DOES NOT MATCH (wrong value)
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-2.3" href="#section-2.3">2.3</a>. Requested Attributes in Search</span>
Clients can provide language tag options in each AttributeDescription
in the requested attribute list in a search request.
If language tag options are provided in an attribute description,
then only attributes in a directory entry whose attribute
descriptions have the same attribute type or its subtype and contains
<span class="grey">Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 5]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-6" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a> Language Tags and Ranges in LDAP July 2004</span>
each of the presented (and possibly other) language tag options are
to be returned. Thus if a client requests just the attribute
"name;lang-en", the server would return "name;lang-en" and
"CN;lang-en;lang-ja" but not "SN" nor "name;lang-fr".
Clients can provide in the attribute list multiple
AttributeDescriptions which have the same base attribute type but
different options. For example, a client could provide both
"name;lang-en" and "name;lang-fr", and this would permit an attribute
with either language tag option to be returned. Note there would be
no need to provide both "name" and "name;lang-en" since all subtypes
of name would match "name".
If a server does not support storing attributes with language tag
options in the DIT, then any attribute descriptions in the list which
include language tag options are to be ignored, just as if they were
unknown attribute types.
If a request is made specifying all attributes or an attribute is
requested without providing a language tag option, then all attribute
values regardless of their language tag option are returned.
For example, if the client requests a "description" attribute, and a
matching entry contains the following attributes:
objectClass: top
objectClass: organization
O: Software GmbH
description: software products
description;lang-en: software products
description;lang-de: Softwareprodukte
The server would return:
description: software products
description;lang-en: software products
description;lang-de: Softwareprodukte
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-2.4" href="#section-2.4">2.4</a>. Compare</span>
Language tag options can be present in an AttributeDescription used
in a compare request AttributeValueAssertion. This is to be treated
by servers the same as the use of language tag options in a search
filter with an equality match, as described in <a href="#section-2.2">Section 2.2</a>. If there
is no attribute in the entry with the same attribute type or its
subtype and contains each of the presented (or possibly other)
language tag options, the noSuchAttributeType error will be returned.
<span class="grey">Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 6]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-7" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a> Language Tags and Ranges in LDAP July 2004</span>
Thus, for example, a compare request of type "name" and assertion
value "Johann", against an entry containing the following attributes:
objectClass: top
objectClass: person
givenName;lang-de-DE: Johann
CN: Johann Sibelius
SN: Sibelius
would cause the server to return compareTrue.
However, if the client issued a compare request of type
"name;lang-de" and assertion value "Johann" against the above entry,
the request would fail with the noSuchAttributeType error.
If the server does not support storing attributes with language tag
options in the DIT, then any comparison which includes a language tag
option will always fail to locate an attribute, and
noSuchAttributeType will be returned.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-2.5" href="#section-2.5">2.5</a>. Add Operation</span>
Clients can provide language options in AttributeDescription in
attributes of a new entry to be created.
A client can provide multiple attributes with the same attribute type
and value, so long as each attribute has a different set of language
tag options.
For example, the following is a valid request:
dn: CN=John Smith,DC=example,DC=com
objectClass: residentialPerson
CN: John Smith
CN;lang-en: John Smith
SN: Smith
SN;lang-en: Smith
streetAddress: 1 University Street
streetAddress;lang-en-US: 1 University Street
streetAddress;lang-fr: 1 rue Universite
houseIdentifier;lang-fr: 9e etage
If a server does not support storing language tag options with
attribute values in the DIT, then it MUST treat an
AttributeDescription with a language tag option as an unrecognized
attribute. If the server forbids the addition of unrecognized
attributes then it MUST fail the add request with an appropriate
result code.
<span class="grey">Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 7]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-8" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a> Language Tags and Ranges in LDAP July 2004</span>
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-2.6" href="#section-2.6">2.6</a>. Modify Operation</span>
A client can provide language tag options in an AttributeDescription
as part of a modification element in the modify operation.
Attribute types and language tag options MUST match exactly against
values stored in the directory. For example, if the modification is
a "delete", then if the stored values to be deleted have language tag
options, then those language tag options MUST be provided in the
modify operation, and if the stored values to be deleted do not have
any language tag option, then no language tag option is to be
provided.
If the server does not support storing language tag options with
attribute values in the DIT, then it MUST treat an
AttributeDescription with a language tag option as an unrecognized
attribute, and MUST fail the request with an appropriate result code.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-3" href="#section-3">3</a>. Use of Language Ranges in LDAP</span>
Since the publication of <a href="./rfc2596">RFC 2596</a>, it has become apparent that there
is a need to provide a mechanism for a client to request attributes
based upon set of language tag options whose tags all begin with the
same sequence of language sub-tags.
AttributeDescriptions containing language range options are intended
to be used in attribute value assertions, search attribute lists, and
other places where the client desires to provide an attribute
description matching of a range of language tags associated with
attributes.
A language range option conforms to the following ABNF [<a href="./rfc2234" title=""Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF"">RFC2234</a>]:
language-range-option = "lang-" [ Language-Tag "-" ]
where the Language-Tag production is as defined in <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp47">BCP 47</a> [<a href="./rfc3066" title=""Tags for the Identification of Languages"">RFC3066</a>].
This production and those it imports from [<a href="./rfc2234" title=""Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF"">RFC2234</a>] are provided in
<a href="#section-2.1">Section 2.1</a> for convenience.
A language range option matches a language tag option if the language
range option less the trailing "-" matches exactly the language tag
or if the language range option (including the trailing "-") matches
a prefix of the language tag option. Note that the language range
option "lang-" matches all language tag options.
<span class="grey">Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 8]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-9" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a> Language Tags and Ranges in LDAP July 2004</span>
Examples of valid AttributeDescription containing language range
options:
givenName;lang-en-
CN;lang-
SN;lang-de-;lang-gem-
O;lang-x-;x-foobar
A language range option is not a tagging option. Attributes cannot
be stored with language range options. Any attempt to add or update
an attribute description with a language range option SHALL be
treated as an undefined attribute type and result in an error.
A language range option has no effect on the transfer encoding nor on
the syntax of the attribute values.
Servers SHOULD support assertion of language ranges for any attribute
type which they allow to be stored with language tags.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.1" href="#section-3.1">3.1</a>. Search Filter</span>
If a language range option is present in an AttributeDescription in
an assertion, then for each entry within scope, the values of each
attribute whose AttributeDescription consists of the same attribute
type or its subtypes and contains a language tag option matching the
language range option are to be returned.
Thus, for example, a filter of an equality match of type
"name;lang-en-" and assertion value "Billy Ray", against the
following directory entry:
dn: SN=Ray,DC=example,DC=com
objectClass: person DOES NOT MATCH (wrong type)
objectClass: extensibleObject DOES NOT MATCH (wrong type)
name;lang-en-US: Billy Ray MATCHES
name;lang-en-US: Billy Bob DOES NOT MATCH (wrong value)
CN;lang-en-US: Billy Ray MATCHES
CN;lang-en-US;x-foobar: Billy Ray MATCHES
CN;lang-en;x-foobar: Billy Ray MATCHES
CN;x-foobar: Billy Ray DOES NOT MATCH (no lang-)
name: Billy Ray DOES NOT MATCH (no lang-)
SN;lang-en-GB;lang-en-US: Billy Ray MATCHES
SN: Ray DOES NOT MATCH (no lang-,
wrong value)
Note that "CN" and "SN" are subtypes of "name".
<span class="grey">Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 9]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-10" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a> Language Tags and Ranges in LDAP July 2004</span>
If the server does not support storing attributes with language tag
options in the DIT, then any assertion which includes a language
range option will not match as it is an unrecognized attribute type.
No error would be returned because of this; a presence filter would
evaluate to FALSE and all other assertions to Undefined.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.2" href="#section-3.2">3.2</a>. Requested Attributes in Search</span>
Clients can provide language range options in each
AttributeDescription in the requested attribute list in a search
request.
If a language range option is provided in an attribute description,
then only attributes in a directory entry whose attribute
descriptions have the same attribute type or its subtype and a
language tag option matching the provided language range option are
to be returned. Thus if a client requests just the attribute
"name;lang-en-", the server would return "name;lang-en-US" and
"CN;lang-en;lang-ja" but not "SN" nor "name;lang-fr".
Clients can provide in the attribute list multiple
AttributeDescriptions which have the same base attribute type but
different options. For example a client could provide both
"name;lang-en-" and "name;lang-fr-", and this would permit an
attribute whose type was name or subtype of name and with a language
tag option matching either language range option to be returned.
If a server does not support storing attributes with language tag
options in the DIT, then any attribute descriptions in the list which
include language range options are to be ignored, just as if they
were unknown attribute types.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-3.3" href="#section-3.3">3.3</a>. Compare</span>
Language range options can be present in an AttributeDescription used
in a compare request AttributeValueAssertion. This is to be treated
by servers the same as the use of language range options in a search
filter with an equality match, as described in <a href="#section-3.1">Section 3.1</a>. If there
is no attribute in the entry with the same subtype and a matching
language tag option, the noSuchAttributeType error will be returned.
Thus, for example, a compare request of type "name;lang-" and
assertion value "Johann", against the entry with the following
attributes:
<span class="grey">Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 10]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-11" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a> Language Tags and Ranges in LDAP July 2004</span>
objectClass: top
objectClass: person
givenName;lang-de-DE: Johann
CN: Johann Sibelius
SN: Sibelius
will cause the server to return compareTrue. (Note that the language
range option "lang-" matches any language tag option.)
However, if the client issued a compare request of type
"name;lang-de" and assertion value "Sibelius" against the above
entry, the request would fail with the noSuchAttributeType error.
If the server does not support storing attributes with language tag
options in the DIT, then any comparison which includes a language
range option will always fail to locate an attribute, and
noSuchAttributeType will be returned.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-4" href="#section-4">4</a>. Discovering Language Option Support</span>
A server SHOULD indicate that it supports storing attributes with
language tag options in the DIT by publishing 1.3.6.1.4.1.4203.1.5.4
as a value of the root DSE.
A server SHOULD indicate that it supports language range matching of
attributes with language tag options stored in the DIT by publishing
1.3.6.1.4.1.4203.1.5.5 as a value of the "supportedFeatures"
[<a href="./rfc3674" title=""Feature Discovery in Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP)"">RFC3674</a>] attribute in the root DSE.
A server MAY restrict use of language tag options to a subset of the
attribute types it recognizes. This document does not define a
mechanism for determining which subset of attribute types can be used
with language tag options.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-5" href="#section-5">5</a>. Interoperability with Non-supporting Implementations</span>
Implementators of this specification should take care that their use
of language tag options does not impede proper function of
implementations which do not support language tags.
Per <a href="./rfc2251">RFC 2251</a>, "an AttributeDescription with one or more options is
treated as a subtype of the attribute type without any options." A
non-supporting server will treat an AttributeDescription with any
language tag options as an unrecognized attribute type. A non-
supporting client will either do the same, or will treat the
AttributeDescription as it would any other unknown subtype.
Typically, non-supporting clients simply ignore unrecognized subtypes
(and unrecognized attribute types) of attributes they request.
<span class="grey">Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 11]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-12" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a> Language Tags and Ranges in LDAP July 2004</span>
To ensure proper function of non-supporting clients, supporting
clients SHOULD ensure that entries they populate with tagged values
are also populated with non-tagged values.
Additionally, supporting clients SHOULD be prepared to handle entries
which are not populated with tagged values.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-6" href="#section-6">6</a>. Security Considerations</span>
Language tags and range options are used solely to indicate the
native language of values and in querying the directory for values
which fulfill the user's language needed. These options are not
known to raise specific security considerations. However, the reader
should consider general directory security issues detailed in the
LDAP technical specification [<a href="./rfc3377" title=""Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Technical Specification"">RFC3377</a>].
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-7" href="#section-7">7</a>. IANA Considerations</span>
Registration of these protocol mechanisms [<a href="./rfc3383" title=""Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Considerations for Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP)"">RFC3383</a>] has been
completed by the IANA.
Subject: Request for LDAP Protocol Mechanism Registration
Object Identifier: 1.3.6.1.4.1.4203.1.5.4
Description: Language Tag Options
Object Identifier: 1.3.6.1.4.1.4203.1.5.5
Description: Language Range Options
Person & email address to contact for further information:
Kurt Zeilenga <kurt@openldap.org>
Usage: Feature
Specification: <a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a>
Author/Change Controller: IESG
Comments: none
These OIDs were assigned [<a href="#ref-ASSIGN" title=""OpenLDAP OID Delegations"">ASSIGN</a>] by OpenLDAP Foundation, under its
IANA-assigned private enterprise allocation [<a href="#ref-PRIVATE" title=""Private Enterprise Numbers"">PRIVATE</a>], for use in
this specification.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-8" href="#section-8">8</a>. Acknowledgments</span>
This document is a revision of <a href="./rfc2596">RFC 2596</a> by Mark Wahl and Tim Howes.
<a href="./rfc2596">RFC 2596</a> was a product of the IETF ASID and LDAPEXT working groups.
This document also borrows from a number of IETF documents including
<a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp47">BCP 47</a> by H. Alvestrand.
<span class="grey">Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 12]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-13" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a> Language Tags and Ranges in LDAP July 2004</span>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-9" href="#section-9">9</a>. References</span>
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-9.1" href="#section-9.1">9.1</a>. Normative References</span>
[<a id="ref-RFC2119">RFC2119</a>] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp14">BCP 14</a>, <a href="./rfc2119">RFC 2119</a>, March 1997.
[<a id="ref-RFC2234">RFC2234</a>] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for
Syntax Specifications: ABNF", <a href="./rfc2234">RFC 2234</a>, November 1997.
[<a id="ref-RFC2251">RFC2251</a>] Wahl, M., Howes, T. and S. Kille, "Lightweight
Directory Access Protocol (v3)", <a href="./rfc2251">RFC 2251</a>, December
1997.
[<a id="ref-RFC3066">RFC3066</a>] Alvestrand, H., "Tags for the Identification of
Languages", <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp47">BCP 47</a>, <a href="./rfc3066">RFC 3066</a>, January 2001.
[<a id="ref-RFC3377">RFC3377</a>] Hodges, J. and R. Morgan, "Lightweight Directory Access
Protocol (v3): Technical Specification", <a href="./rfc3377">RFC 3377</a>,
September 2002.
[<a id="ref-RFC3674">RFC3674</a>] Zeilenga, K., "Feature Discovery in Lightweight
Directory Access Protocol (LDAP)", <a href="./rfc3674">RFC 3674</a>, December
2003.
[<a id="ref-ASCII">ASCII</a>] Coded Character Set--7-bit American Standard Code for
Information Interchange, ANSI X3.4-1986.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-9.2" href="#section-9.2">9.2</a>. Informative References</span>
[<a id="ref-X.501">X.501</a>] International Telecommunication Union -
Telecommunication Standardization Sector, "The
Directory -- Models," X.501(1997).
[<a id="ref-RFC3383">RFC3383</a>] Zeilenga, K., "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
(IANA) Considerations for Lightweight Directory Access
Protocol (LDAP)", <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp64">BCP 64</a>, <a href="./rfc3383">RFC 3383</a>, September 2002.
[<a id="ref-ASSIGN">ASSIGN</a>] OpenLDAP Foundation, "OpenLDAP OID Delegations",
<a href="http://www.openldap.org/foundation/oid-delegate.txt">http://www.openldap.org/foundation/oid-delegate.txt</a>.
[<a id="ref-PRIVATE">PRIVATE</a>] IANA, "Private Enterprise Numbers",
<a href="http://www.iana.org/assignments/enterprise-numbers">http://www.iana.org/assignments/enterprise-numbers</a>.
<span class="grey">Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 13]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-14" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a> Language Tags and Ranges in LDAP July 2004</span>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="appendix-A" href="#appendix-A">Appendix A</a>. Differences from <a href="./rfc2596">RFC 2596</a></span>
This document adds support for language ranges, provides a mechanism
that a client can use to discover whether a server supports language
tags and ranges, and clarifies how attributes with multiple language
tags are to be treated. This document is a significant rewrite of
<a href="./rfc2596">RFC 2596</a>.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="appendix-B" href="#appendix-B">Appendix B</a>. Differences from X.500(1997)</span>
X.500(1997) [<a href="#ref-X.501" title=""The Directory -- Models,"">X.501</a>] defines a different mechanism, contexts, as the
means of representing language tags (codes). This section summarizes
the major differences in approach.
a) An X.500 operation which has specified a language code on a value
matches a value in the directory without a language code.
b) LDAP references <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp47">BCP 47</a> [<a href="./rfc3066" title=""Tags for the Identification of Languages"">RFC3066</a>], which allows for IANA
registration of new tags as well as unregistered tags.
c) LDAP supports language ranges (new in this revision).
d) LDAP does not allow language tags (and ranges) in distinguished
names.
e) X.500 describes subschema administration procedures to allow
language codes to be associated with particular attributes types.
Editor's Address
Kurt D. Zeilenga
OpenLDAP Foundation
EMail: Kurt@OpenLDAP.org
<span class="grey">Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 14]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-15" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc3866">RFC 3866</a> Language Tags and Ranges in LDAP July 2004</span>
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject
to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp78">BCP 78</a>, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp78">BCP 78</a> and <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp79">BCP 79</a>.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
<a href="http://www.ietf.org/ipr">http://www.ietf.org/ipr</a>.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Zeilenga Standards Track [Page 15]
</pre>
|
