[x500standard] Re: New defect report on missing organisation information
- From: denis.pinkas@xxxxxxxx
- To: x500standard@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 16:59:37 +0200
Hummm !
The "defect" is presented this way:
The organizationName is not always enough to identify a organisation. At
times an additional information necessary, like some kind of identifier
issued by the authorities.
First of all, the sentence is not English. At the minimum a verb is
missing in the second sentence.
But more important, I disagree that it is a "defect report". It looks like
an enhancement.
Then, the "pseudo defect" is not correctly characterized.
So if the question is not correctly stated, how could any solution be
appropriate ?
Denis
De : "Erik Andersen" <era@xxxxxxx>
A : "Directory list" <x500standard@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date : 30/03/2012 14:41
Objet : [x500standard] New defect report on missing organisation
information
Envoyé par : x500standard-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
I have issued a new defect report 381. See
http://www.x500standard.com/index.php?n=Ig.DefectReports
Any comments?
Erik
Other related posts:
