Re: [netmod] Use XML namespaces in YANG document examples

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Fri, 11 February 2022 17:33 UTC

Return-Path: <andy@yumaworks.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54E093A003C for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 09:33:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.887
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.887 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yumaworks-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com
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 zPv7sGn6aRdc for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 09:32:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lj1-x235.google.com (mail-lj1-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6AEBB3A0121 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 09:32:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lj1-x235.google.com with SMTP id e17so13479440ljk.5 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 09:32:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=9KBExzC7ZD2eiLocQK3APtMaSqpydlvJulA9EB9rBSM=; b=tl7dmbY6yYOPrxlylMA0JZPHT+RP2I4ohaGrbzRyLnjPBtNvt7y7aznDu7vFs6KaOm E73W+Y+f2CWpNX4PfGXooD3uumJtwPo/lNEyST1YlnV8zLPVYFr2T5zoyn37Szf8bqFT ATR89IvOZQuRPWgwrzMhY955QPXlYttbvbHagaz6XHHke6jAA2ioQChNX7VVJjrvT25W RBdYE0I7DfgtZZxjigw6DNHeO5HwbDqOPf76MU2ujTLiihrrBLPhrtCqK+gwoDxy9WxZ D9Evz1wrRqicwaM1Y+aLwj1MZM2XT8OZZGhZh9y+xq7FVHZkmUyYTNcdkmnxRCoea1jd FQtA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=9KBExzC7ZD2eiLocQK3APtMaSqpydlvJulA9EB9rBSM=; b=F0xG9CT7PG6xED+9LbzKWlHOCo3IiWDKm5iocQuRYhXInFZfMinwRxPKB3GPIu2ZIF axQv9wTBoaD56NYeYnu0nh8XHkdyrcCFOMIhFOjAKJ2X9rvdPLRC5CgfO9qNIz78viTG rjuixI2SalI7B22s5Evl2hqmHIs0AI2HBr8fBfdAzus6hKl0p8GTbgac97neLSfldHNk Wznbb2BIC6vHiWupvrP103fYS1vgqM+9dXn9zDflBDVKOjvg4XdRB7IU5b/bdk1QImAX Kl4W1/RcW1eNav4tUDLwzE4W4fntIrbCGlZASNfhlHgLlFfZ0S4QjYTGUekKQiXG9VQ/ 6qxw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530IrShRufQB1CJyk3tgTqmWiv6RsvB1mSTPzR2xidk2xBIoyOnZ fRphLsv8l6ZyxR2V8AYKJDskMhV9g9YJpVwtqe/DeQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJweMUnd1jiEiD3KyX4bV/IX7sbM2ZWFR+g387BajbmFWKPNTXViE66ZYoCL6BhUngGHpTR8+AQSQU4dldIlK2k=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:86d8:: with SMTP id n24mr1620121ljj.344.1644600771200; Fri, 11 Feb 2022 09:32:51 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAHBU6is235QT3d7q+0xhJHdtVna_9-qjGzHG_P4gnMd6nKtdTw@mail.gmail.com> <20220204.081841.166197909676487568.id@4668.se> <866e763b-88ce-ca3f-300a-7f702467fe7c@mg-soft.si> <20220204.161536.1816358672148417997.id@4668.se> <5BDB40B2-F191-41BC-92DF-BD0A94B6E992@gmx.com> <20220207200304.qhkvwrxwl5i56qqk@anna> <AM7PR07MB6248E7E96CBA846EC59C2DC4A02F9@AM7PR07MB6248.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <B30D2207-BE27-4E68-A9D1-3F17B0154345@tzi.org> <AM7PR07MB62480FC33CDC9A1FA31CFE26A02F9@AM7PR07MB6248.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <F9A842A4-DCD4-4860-BA4A-6AB341583ED4@tzi.org> <AM7PR07MB6248796A4130EA81F152886AA0309@AM7PR07MB6248.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR07MB6248796A4130EA81F152886AA0309@AM7PR07MB6248.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 09:32:40 -0800
Message-ID: <CABCOCHR90PTC=ixqep5U39Nsa0bWEH9G-QA_A0-z=-wOXmOz2A@mail.gmail.com>
To: tom petch <ietfc@btconnect.com>
Cc: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c3e3bf05d7c17466"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/D4jXcE58Hh4RDsBt4uzaN6NK4lI>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Use XML namespaces in YANG document examples
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 17:33:01 -0000

On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 9:04 AM tom petch <ietfc@btconnect.com> wrote:

> From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
> Sent: 11 February 2022 08:21
> >> (I’m also still not sure I’ve got an answer to my question about using
> inconsistent prefixes between YANG and the XML example.  What is being
> demonstrated here?)
> >>
> > <tp>
> > If you are referring to
> > " Is there a reason to violate the SHOULD?"
>
> I’m referring to the question I was trying to ask when I said this :-)
>
> > I did not see that as related to the thread but thought it was answered
> anyway by Juergen.  As he said, the SHOULD gets violated when prefix clash
> which, in the absence of a registry, a namespace, for prefix is possible.
>
> Yes, and thanks to him for answering my question as a general question.
>
> I was answering to a throwaway note that the authors got flak when their
> XML did not use the defined prefix.  My question was: why do that, then?
> Maybe that was not understood because “ianaift” actually *is* the prefix
> preferred in the YANG module, so my question doesn’t make sense.  (I’m not
> sure what the throwaway referred to.)
>
>
A prefix in an XML instance document and a prefix in a YANG document are
separate
and the rules for each are separate.  An implementation MUST handle any
prefix used
in either case.

<tp>
>
> Try again.
>
> I have commented a number of times on a YANG import which defines a prefix
> other than that in the RFC.  Last month, it was
>      import ietf-hardware {
>        prefix ietfhw;
> Usually, when I comment on this, the authors accept my comment and change
> the prefix - they did on this occasion - but sometimes I get pushback along
> the lines that YANG Guidelines is only a 'SHOULD' and we think that we have
> a good reason to ignore the 'SHOULD' .  To date, I have never agreed with
> the reason and go on commenting:-)  If that is flack, then yes, I have -
> and will - generate flack:-)
>

This is a readability issue and I agree with your efforts to enforce this
SHOULD.
It MAY be ignored only if usage of an assigned prefix would cause a conflict
(because 2 imported modules defined the same prefix-stmt value).


> Tom Petch
>
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>
>
>
Andy


> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>