Re: [netconf] Yangdoctors last call review of draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-types-18

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:34:12PM +0000, Kent Watsen wrote:
> 
> Hi Juergen,
> 
> Whittling out things resolved...
> 
> K.
> 
> > 
> >> - Does it make sense to have a new notation like
> >>> 
> >>>     |  The diagram above uses syntax that is similar to but not
> >>>     |  defined in [RFC8340].
> >>> 
> >>> or shall this simply become regular text?
> >> 
> >> I find using tree-diagram like notation for features, identities, and typedefs helpful, especially in showing the “if-feature” constraints and hierarchical relationships between items.  I recommend adding these enhancements to RFC 8340.  It would be helpful if someone could whip up an I-D so these documents could reference the I-D instead of having the "The diagram above uses syntax that is similar to but not defined in [RFC8340]” language.
> >> 
> >> That said, I also used a "rfc8340-like" diagram to list all the groupings in a module.  It seems like the consistent thing to do, but I can’t imagine the RFC 8340 being updated to support that output, so I replaced that diagram, with a normal "xml2rfc" list, in the entire suite of drafts.
> > 
> > I am sorry, I should have been clearer. My comment did not concern the
> > diagrams but the mere fact that you have
> > 
> >      |  The diagram above uses syntax that is similar to but not
> >      |  defined in [RFC8340].
> > 
> > instead of simply
> > 
> >   The diagram above uses syntax that is similar to but not
> >   defined in [RFC8340].
> > 
> > and this is really an editorial nit if at all. The diagram itself I
> > like, it would be nice to have them in RFC 8340bis.
> 
> Ah, now I understand, you mean to remove the XML2RFC v3 “aside”?  I agree that it renders poorly in plain-text, but it renders inside a pretty-box for HTML and PDF.  Thoughts?

Ah, its called an "aside". I am still reading plain-text but the
question likely is what belongs into an aside box and what into
text. For me, there is no reason to put this sentence into an 'aside'
box - whatever the purpose of such a box is. Its just a regular
sentence for me.
 
> Yes, the diagrams would be a nice addition to an 8340bis.  Also, I don’t know if you noticed, but the “Data Model Overview” section I created in all these drafts is highly mechanical…something that could be mostly automated…perhaps a good student project?  ;)

Students tend to do something half and then disappear. ;-) 

/js

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