Re: [weirds] Entity name searches

[Andrew Newton <[e-mail]>]

It depends. Are you trying to do something useful or trying to meet a
conformance checkbox?

If it is the former, I'm unsure who would complain with your broadened
search results. If the issue is that the semantics in the
specification should be better, its best to have a concrete proposal
to put in an Internet Draft.

If you are trying to conform to something like an ICANN agreement, I'd
do as the RFC says because ICANN has signalled they intend to submit
Internet Drafts describing the search capabilities they specifically
need. Anything you guess at today is likely just to be extra work.

-andy

On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Brian Mountford <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Well, for instance, one might want to search the organization. When I do a
> WHOIS query for google.com, the contacts have an organization of Google Inc.
> I might want to search for all contacts with that organization.
>
> I can try to tailor the interpretation, but since the search string syntax
> does not allow for arbitrary suffix searching, it's not clear what tailoring
> is possible. Are you saying that I could take an entity name search string
> of "McB*" and interpret that as a search for names any of whose words begin
> with McB, so that it would find Joe McBride as well as McBurns Simpson? That
> seems to be playing pretty loose with the partial search string rules, since
> the RFC takes pains to define that syntax so precisely.
>
> Brian
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Andrew Newton <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>> Welcome to the world of internationalization, where the concept of a
>> last name vs a first name is not universal, and US ASCII is not
>> representative all the characters used.
>>
>> Since you know the data in your database best, you should taylor the
>> interpretation of the query input to that which works best with your
>> registry.
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 5:54 AM, Brian Mountford <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > And only names? There is no provision for searching entities by address,
>> > etc.?
>> >
>>
>> I don't think that ever came up. It would require an RDAP extension. I
>> do question how useful such a thing would be. Why does anybody care
>> that a particular registry has contacts living on Mumford Lane in East
>> Westover? Are they searching all the registries for that information?
>> Do they need a telephone book instead?
>>
>> -andy
>
>