IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: analysis of YANG vs. RELAX NG

"Tim Bray" <tbray@textuality.com> Sun, 02 December 2007 20:42 UTC

Return-path: <discuss-bounces@apps.ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iyvdo-00006W-Pi; Sun, 02 Dec 2007 15:42:16 -0500
Received: from discuss by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Iyvdm-0008OP-LQ for discuss-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 02 Dec 2007 15:42:14 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iyvdm-0008OB-Bl for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Sun, 02 Dec 2007 15:42:14 -0500
Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.179]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iyvdm-0003ut-0L for discuss@apps.ietf.org; Sun, 02 Dec 2007 15:42:14 -0500
Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id m16so4371820waf for <discuss@apps.ietf.org>; Sun, 02 Dec 2007 12:42:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=lKNsvGXydvTPU5D2vvoBPkc2QBUFU8gfnlcvpXj5FHM=; b=VfCPbXpLPHhDeFOGSqcZFgwgLffXndJfzE6BY777pWTtJBTA1DoMhAl6XyqMRBb8hd9oAjk8z9ifmGDGqqKNRLdLSjS/9vNmLCh9JgrZOWMb+wxCKMY+cQsLqeC8Q6ldQZyE2sUU9KAObKLE76JyDKl4wJ8STa7VeKdY88bClu8=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=v03plQB5H7+hn21IvDhrGI3bTyrNak6WaK9EAtTzhHSfP8S9mx3oH0gWxqvnmFVjQo1hK4Pm33pBU3w1B+LsP15FX/vg5lAAePvbofu4JFzdjHZeqMWbgwF7ZSRt8nMqVeS92ZDpww1mW3s5Dy8OzFEyXASbncOE6H/7b6WHc8A=
Received: by 10.115.107.1 with SMTP id j1mr2972350wam.1196628127093; Sun, 02 Dec 2007 12:42:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.114.161.15 with HTTP; Sun, 2 Dec 2007 12:42:07 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <517bf110712021242v43c462f0v86267f591e5cdfbd@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2007 12:42:07 -0800
From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: analysis of YANG vs. RELAX NG
In-Reply-To: <47512728.6040201@gmx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <953beacc0711271504y7aea5f21jc301ccad886d3611@mail.gmail.com> <474D9194.3060103@ericsson.com> <953beacc0711281025w4d993dd7u77d729111074496c@mail.gmail.com> <20071128.230244.254578150.mbj@tail-f.com> <63F8A418-6AF0-4205-ACC7-53A8C7BC6A73@osafoundation.org> <47512728.6040201@gmx.de>
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 1e4b1276f90654ba
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de
Cc: discuss@apps.ietf.org
X-BeenThere: discuss@apps.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: tbray@textuality.com
List-Id: general discussion of application-layer protocols <discuss.apps.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>, <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:discuss@apps.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>, <mailto:discuss-request@apps.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: discuss-bounces@apps.ietf.org

On Dec 1, 2007 1:19 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:

> Well, that depends on the schema language. RelaxNG allows to define
> languages that use the must-ignore rule for new elements.

I've been staying off this thread because I don't understand what a
NETCONF is or what you'd do with one.  But Julian's point is massively
important.  If you're going to design your own modeling language, you
need to spend a *lot* of time thinking about the extensibility model.
It's really easy to get wrong.  -Tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email