On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 06:32:10PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Wed, Jan 03, 2007 at 12:50:27AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > wouter@country:~$ ldapsearch -h 'db.debian.org' -b'cn=Subschema' -x -s base '(objectClass=*)' attributeTypes | grep gender > > attributeTypes: ( 1.3.6.1.4.1.9586.100.4.2.30 NAME 'gender' DESC 'ISO 5218 rep > > resentation of human gender' EQUALITY integerMatch SYNTAX 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.11 > > > In other words, if you want to see that changed, take it up with ISO. > > No, changing it unilaterally in Debian won't help, either; In LDAP, a > > field of a specific name always (*always*) has a certain syntax; > > breaking that would break software that expects this particular field to > > be in that particular syntax. > > That's not completely true; you could have an attribute type named 'gender' > with a different OID and different syntax/semantics, you just wouldn't be > able to use it on an LDAP server which also needed the use of the ISO > attribute type or of any object classes that are defined to use the ISO > attribute. > > But if all of our Japanese, Chinese, Greek Orthodox, Muslim, and French > Revolutionary developers can tolerate having to enter their birthdates using > the Gregorian calendar, I think we'll be able to make do with an opt-in > binary gender classification too. Hi Steve, I have yet to see a use case for this LDAP item. Is it strictly for a male/femaie survey that other FLOSS projects will join? Does this mean that people who dont self-identify as male or female are just not counted? According to some stats that could be 100 people. Is there any ISO standard that is inclusive of those uncounted people? cheers, Kev -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | | : :' : The Universal | 'under construction' | | `. `' Operating System | go to counter.li.org and | | `- http://www.debian.org/ | be counted! #238656 | | my keysever: pgp.mit.edu | my NPO: cfsg.org |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature