IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [media-types] [Netconf] request review of media type application/yang-data+xml

Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Fri, 01 July 2016 08:31 UTC

Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.com>
X-Original-To: media-types@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: media-types@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E488112D1F0 for <media-types@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jul 2016 01:31:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.936
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.936 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cnT3TyehgsIS for <media-types@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jul 2016 01:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pechora1.lax.icann.org (pechora1.icann.org [IPv6:2620:0:2d0:201::1:71]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6AD3012B009 for <media-types@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Jul 2016 01:31:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [46.21.102.45]) by pechora1.lax.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u618Uo8E024400 for <media-types@iana.org>; Fri, 1 Jul 2016 08:31:11 GMT
Received: from localhost (unknown [173.38.220.44]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 47D5F1AE0398; Fri, 1 Jul 2016 10:30:48 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 10:31:13 +0200
Message-Id: <20160701.103113.301947010745595267.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: andy@yumaworks.com
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABCOCHT+EREQ3RHV2sRuPN3SxSeaZem6Mi1AoeBf1NRFA2NsyA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <d99b9905-6dcf-3f8c-1490-d3e6cd2e93df@seantek.com> <8f8db9b8-9917-4b26-25f6-ee0c19492bb9@seantek.com> <CABCOCHT+EREQ3RHV2sRuPN3SxSeaZem6Mi1AoeBf1NRFA2NsyA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5 on Emacs 24.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: IP, sender and recipient auto-whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (pechora1.lax.icann.org [192.0.33.71]); Fri, 01 Jul 2016 08:31:11 +0000 (UTC)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/media-types/vS7eKrkkR5Fgt65JIm78OsWtT28>
Cc: media-types@iana.org, dev+ietf@seantek.com, netconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [media-types] [Netconf] request review of media type application/yang-data+xml
X-BeenThere: media-types@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IANA mailing list for reviewing Media Type \(MIME Type, Content Type\) registration requests." <media-types.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/media-types>, <mailto:media-types-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/media-types/>
List-Post: <mailto:media-types@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:media-types-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/media-types>, <mailto:media-types-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 08:31:13 -0000

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> wrote:
> removing all text except the fragment identifier issue....
> 
> According to RFC 7303, sec. 5, any usage of +xml requires implementation of
> the XPointerFramework
> https://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-xptr-framework-20030325/

Actually, it says SHOULD:

   If [XPointerFramework] and [XPointerElement] are inappropriate for
   some XML-based media type, it SHOULD NOT follow the naming convention
   '+xml'.

> RESTCONF "fragments" are sub-trees within the YANG data structures.
> These are accessed by the request URI path and the "fields" query parameter.
> XPointer is rather complex and completely redundant for RESTCONF.

I'm not sure the "element()" scheme is complex to implement.  The
"fields" query parameter probably takes more effort to implement.

Note though that the "fields" query parameter is more expressive than
the "element()" scheme, and it works with other encodings than XML.
*if* we were to use XPointer instead of "fields", what would we do for
JSON? 

> So do we have to add text that a RESTCONF server MUST implement the
> "element"
> scheme?

If this indeed is to be interpreted as a requirement, I'd rather not
use the "+xml" name.


/martin

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email