IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Tue, 16 January 2018 15:43 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
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 41D6213159A for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 07:43:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.net
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 WmogEhhRmxrf for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 07:43:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gproxy6-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy6-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [67.222.39.168]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0EB813155A for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 07:43:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from CMOut01 (unknown [10.0.90.82]) by gproxy6.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4790C1E17CC for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 08:18:28 -0700 (MST)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by CMOut01 with id z3JQ1w0052SSUrH013JTmQ; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 08:18:28 -0700
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=CqXPSjwD c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=xqWC_Br6kY4A:10 a=RgaUWeydRksA:10 a=5awoqvzuvkKRslJaNPYA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version :Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=WLVtr4IjZ/LZk+oe+exNOJ/6dQomKQYp4Bwppw4R0Yo=; b=MrNxTzwo889IbTwgzU8KFT0+a4 7kfAu47Fgg3I3pKuWoA85Ra5Gwbc+1S6lS+9jWZD8uNk77ViD31My99sN6V0/I/R42EUNWSTR57sz YbEtYfUbfjiPDp1gWDiZel68C;
Received: from pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.15.86.101]:51170 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1ebT0J-003yt1-Rh; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 08:18:23 -0700
To: Vladimir Vassilev <vladimir@transpacket.com>, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
References: <2cde8b64-0455-a513-4719-feb61c87a952@bogus.com> <aa7a1449-fd6e-e4c6-7568-41061c09d9f2@transpacket.com> <20180116.115606.561861432247288407.mbj@tail-f.com> <e94d1ed3-e859-3167-501f-ce23e77804df@transpacket.com>
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Message-ID: <e3afbcc2-a682-7147-b14d-ec9a386295c1@labn.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 10:18:22 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <e94d1ed3-e859-3167-501f-ce23e77804df@transpacket.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 100.15.86.101
X-Exim-ID: 1ebT0J-003yt1-Rh
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([IPv6:::1]) [100.15.86.101]:51170
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 6
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
X-Local-Domain: yes
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/GhwCIz3jkthjh-pWhZhLNKyaM8s>
Subject: Re: [netmod] WGLC - draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:43:47 -0000


On 1/16/2018 10:08 AM, Vladimir Vassilev wrote:
>>> 4. This bit I found confusing. I propose this change to unambiguously
>>> describe the current pyang format.
>>>
>>> OLD:
>>>            *  for a leaf-list or list
>>>            [<keys>] for a list's keys
>>> NEW:
>>>            *  for a leaf-list or list without keys
>>>            * [<keys>] for a list with keys
>> Hmm, wouldn't it be better to use [] for a list w/o keys?
> Yes I also agree this improves readability at the cost of slight
> redundancy increase and modification to format of diagrams already used
> in RFCs. Your call.
>
> Vladimir

(as contributor) I agree with martin on this point.

Lou

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email