Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-lhotka-netmod-yang-markup-00

[t.petch <[e-mail]>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Bierman" <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 5:44 PM

> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 6:02 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <
> [e-mail]> wrote:
>
> > I think it is crucial that descriptions etc. remain human readable
> > using plain text readers. Having to run a renderer to make sense out
> > of descriptions etc. would be a big failure and things are even
worse
> > if modules use different dialects all over the place.
> >
> > I believe there is way more important work to get done than this
(and
> > I fear endless discussions about which adapted subsets of markdown
or
> > (whatever comes next) to use). I do not object this work, but I also
> > do not support it at this point in time.
> >
> >
> +1
>
> IMO this makes YANG less readable, especially without any agreement
> on the specific markup supported. A YANG module should be readable by
humans
> without any special tools required.

I agree.  I would say that if you cannot say it in text/plain, then you
probably should not be saying it (something I would extend to e-mail but
realise that I am less likely to get support there:-)

Tom Petch

> > /js
> >
> >
> Andy
>
>
> > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 02:53:08PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > > Robert Wilton <[e-mail]> writes:
> > >
> > > > Yes/support.  But with the condition that I would still like the
draft
> > > > to define a basic common subset of markdown fields/annotations
that
> > > > implementations would be expected to support.  For clarity, I'm
not
> > > > suggesting that the draft should define a new markdown language,
I
> > think
> > > > that it would be better to use an existing markdown language,
but
> > > > perhaps simplified.
> > >
> > > In my view, this needs to remain purely optional, so
implementations
> > > won't be expected to support anything. It should be perfectly fine
to
> > > leave description texts unprocessed, or process only selected
> > > constructs.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I want to avoid the scenario where each group of YANG modelers
could
> > > > decide to use a different incompatible variant of text/markdown,
and
> > > > hence generic tools would not be able to reliably render the
markup for
> > > > a generic YANG module.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, particular markup conventions might be dictated
by
> > > external circumstances. For example, for modules hosted at GitHub,
the
> > > GFM variant of text/markdown looks like a natural choice but
elsewhere
> > > it can be something different. William also suggested that certain
> > > YANG-specific constructs may also be introduced.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Care would need to be taken with which variant of the Markdown
language
> > > > is chosen as a base (RFC 7764 may be of use) .  E.g. the github
markup
> > > > language has been previously suggested, but the specification
document
> > > > for that variant is long (approx 120 pages).
> > >
> > > RFC 7763 also notes that markdown itself by design has no concept
of
> > > validity, so I think it is appropriate to take it easy and avoid
> > > overspecifying things.
> > >
> > > I guess the key point here is "lighweight markup": if and
implementation
> > > can make use of it, then fine, but module readers should have
little
> > > difficulty if not.
> > >
> > > Thanks, Lada
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Rob
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 10/04/2017 12:45, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > > >> As the author: yes/support.
> > > >>
> > > >> Two changes seemed to have support in IETF 98 audience:
> > > >>
> > > >> 1. Apart from text/plain, the media type SHOULD be
text/markdown
> > > >> (variants permitted).
> > > >>
> > > >> 2. The "text-media-type" extension can appear anywhere in a
> > (sub)module,
> > > >> and will be scoped to the parent statement and its substaments
(unless
> > > >> overriden).
> > > >>
> > > >> Lada
> > > >>
> > > >> Kent Watsen <[e-mail]> writes:
> > > >>
> > > >>> All,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> This is start of a two-week poll on making the following draft
a
> > > >>> NETMOD working group document:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>    draft-lhotka-netmod-yang-markup-00
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Please send email to the list indicating "yes/support" or
"no/do not
> > > >>> support".  If indicating no, please state your reservations
with the
> > > >>> document.  If yes, please also feel free to provide comments
you'd
> > > >>> like to see addressed once the document is a WG document.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thank you,
> > > >>> NETMOD WG Chairs
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> _______________________________________________
> > > >>> netmod mailing list
> > > >>> [e-mail]
> > > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
> > > PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > netmod mailing list
> > > [e-mail]
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> >
> > --
> > Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> > Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen |
Germany
> > Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > netmod mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> >
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------


> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>