Re: [core] [art] [Last-Call] Call for comments on draft-ietf-core-problem-details-07

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Fri, 01 July 2022 09:22 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7B76C13A22C; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 02:22:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.906
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.906 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AL4j63d1PbK2; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 02:21:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:32::15]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25D8EC13A241; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 02:21:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.118] (p5089ad4f.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.137.173.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4LZ8pl6YkkzDCbV; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:21:51 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.7\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <62BEB9DE.30905@btconnect.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2022 11:21:51 +0200
Cc: "\"Martin J. Dürst\"" <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>, Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Applications and Real-Time Area Discussion <art@ietf.org>, Core WG mailing list <core@ietf.org>, "last-call@ietf.org" <last-call@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-core-problem-details.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-core-problem-details.all@ietf.org>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 678360111.4576319-204cab0efa919e44b65e38b314f30769
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8512766F-C0AC-4B53-8A6B-A68610CAD12A@tzi.org>
References: <165511479760.19573.12671700576299137749@ietfa.amsl.com> <63D13796-758D-469B-AFA8-3050C9F87819@tzi.org> <dde9d36c-61e5-afcc-e15a-787c99d5fba9@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <0012F049-354A-4450-B923-857D24AB9459@tzi.org> <90b785ef-934b-da9d-7d89-7018bdebbb75@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <B96E980A-72E3-4678-B214-8464958845BB@tzi.org> <ff5f8ff1-67fc-eead-6b38-62c8d64ebf45@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <4207E390-270A-463B-A38A-063AD2436370@tzi.org> <16D5BCD8-769A-41C0-A178-6893678CB526@tzi.org> <PA4PR07MB86244C52223D7BE9F1886BE598B89@PA4PR07MB8624.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <AS1PR07MB86160DEF13089FF61CD4B55598BB9@AS1PR07MB8616.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <62BD8990.9080502@btconnect.com> <cee45452-d3b6-26f2-ed76-66c723527a1d@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <62BEB9DE.30905@btconnect.com>
To: tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.7)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/uET2ub81EtE1xoe0Un2VQnQw_9k>
Subject: Re: [core] [art] [Last-Call] Call for comments on draft-ietf-core-problem-details-07
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2022 09:22:01 -0000

> 
> Yes, YANG needs to do what is right for YANG and not put back pressure on other specifications.  If and when there is a proposal for a YANG type for language tags, I will push for the lower case ie as Carsten says
> 
> "So I would have used [a-z]{1,8}(-[a-z0-9]{1,8})* instead of [a-zA-Z]{1,8}(-[a-zA-Z0-9]{1,8})* as the regexp for a language tag."

Yes, that is a complete no-brainer UNLESS there is stuff out there that prefers something different.
Actually, the capitalization rules on 5646 aren’t that complex, so they could be part of a presentation engine for language tags that are interchanged in lower case form.

> but I see that as one for the NETMOD WG perhaps with input from art if some want mixed case:-( YANG can be a but flaky when it comes to string comparisons.  

Note that we are talking about ASCII here ([a-z], that is).
The concept of “case-insensitive” is essentially unworkable outside this assisted living space.

> Some places it insists on lower case (e.g. 'true' 'false'), others it does not. 

But that is not very relevant to *using* strings in YANG.

>  It does have canonical forms but does not do Unicode normalisation and does allow a very wide range of characters.

If you do \d or \w in your patterns, you are!
(Which is one reason why they aren’t in iregexp [1], which is a proper subset of YANG patterns and CDDL regexps that actually is likely to work in reality.)

Don’t do that, then [2].

[a-z] and [0-9] are unambiguous.

Grüße, Carsten

[1]: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-jsonpath-iregexp-00.html
[2]: https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/80970645/doctor-it-hurts-when-i-do-this-then-dont.jpg