Re: [netmod] WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

[joel jaeggli <[e-mail]>]

On 1/16/18 8:01 AM, Robert Wilton wrote:
>
>
> On 16/01/2018 15:40, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
>> Vladimir Vassilev <[e-mail]> wrote:
<snip>
>> Does anyone else have an opinion on this?  I can see three
>> alternatives:
>>
>>    1) allow any number of addtional spaces
>>    2) allow any number of addtional spaces + define a suggested
>>       alignment algorithm
>>    3) mandate the alignment algorithm
>
> Definition of symbols should be precise/consistent, so that readers
> can consistently interpret tree diagrams.
>
> I think that flexibility in layout should be OK, but the draft should
> provide guideline to ensure the output is readable, and likely to be
> broadly consistent (since consistency aids readability).
>
> If the IETF data modeling group is trying to specify text output
> precisely enough that it can be screen scraped then we may want to
> consider whether we are focusing on the right solution ;-)
I would hope that we are not, as the diagrams are programmatically 
generated if you wanted to for example validate them one should do that
from the sources. 

Approaches that result in the most easily human readable, followed by
consistency between tools is probably better for that. That said this is
almost the indentation wars so the proscriptive it gets the more dissent
you can probably find (e.g. 3).

> In summary, (2) is my preference, followed by (1), followed by (3).
>
> Thanks,
> Rob
>
>>
>>
>> /martin
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> netmod mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>> .
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>