Re: [netmod] netmod Digest, Vol 109, Issue 17

[heasley <[e-mail]>]

> > On 13 Apr 2017, at 09:14, Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 08:28:08AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> >> 
> >> We are talking past each other. Are you willing to admit that my draft has nothing to do with the *presence* of markup in a description text, as long as it remains a valid YANG string?
> >> 
> > 
> > I think you do not understand what I am saying. The main purpose of
> > description statements etc. is that they are easily to read by humans.
> > 
> > 7.21.3.  The "description" Statement
> > 
> >   The "description" statement takes as an argument a string that
> >   contains a human-readable textual description of this definition.
> > 
> > I disagree with your claim that human-readable text is markup. The
> > whole RFC series is formatted human-readable text, not markup. I
> > believe this work is heading in the wrong direction, it will lead to
> > endless discussions of many different flavors of markup used in
> > description clauses, and it will harm interoperability at the human
> > eye level.
> > 
> > I believe there are way more important problems to work on. I am out
> > of this thread (since there is more important work to do).
> 
> I believe your discussion habits are sometimes aggressive and unacceptable.
> 
> Lada

I think that Juergen is to the point - and along with Andy is quite correct
that this seems like a distraction and unnecessary.