Re: analysis of YANG vs. RELAX NG

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 03:34:06PM -0800, Lisa Dusseault wrote:
> This is another aspect I'd like to understand better:
>
> On Nov 28, 2007, at 2:02 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>
>> Note that in order to validate the different NETCONF messages, you
>> would either need more than one schema, or a very lax schema which
>> will validate messages/documents which are not actually valid NETCONF.
>
> Validating XML really limits the customizability, the very extensibility of 
> the XML.  You can't add so much as a <custom-text-description> or 
> <debug-info-only> element without it failing at the other end.  Is the goal 
> here to strictly limit netconf data to only standardized and implemented 
> schemas?

The point Martin and Any were trying to make is that validation
against a schema within a NETCONF implementation does not make too
much sense; you have to validate the data exchanged against the
datastore. And the implementations we are aware of do this without
using generix XML schema validators.

And yes, since we are talking about configuration, we do expect that
easy support for vendor extensions is crucial.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>