Re: [netmod] choice/case in tree diagrams

Vladimir Vassilev <vladimir@transpacket.com> Mon, 05 March 2018 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <vladimir@transpacket.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 9928312D7ED for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 06:21:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 8ssj5Oip_LNb for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 06:21:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.transpacket.com (s91205186171.blix.com [91.205.186.171]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76637120454 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 06:21:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.transpacket.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA4FB2F8070F; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 15:21:25 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail.transpacket.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.transpacket.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id dLXRgz9kPG9K; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 15:21:25 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.transpacket.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B00A2F8071A; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 15:21:25 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail.transpacket.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.transpacket.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id SCu52PlNl-Qi; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 15:21:25 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.168.209.122] (s1853520235.blix.com [185.35.202.35]) by mail.transpacket.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 787462F8070F; Mon, 5 Mar 2018 15:21:25 +0100 (CET)
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
References: <20180305125008.sm7izwuic65mhrti@elstar.local> <e65c7b6c-37fa-abbd-b4fd-29d10e7f8437@transpacket.com> <20180305134934.neam7t2snb2wdvon@elstar.local> <20180305.145418.2010818875235650756.mbj@tail-f.com>
From: Vladimir Vassilev <vladimir@transpacket.com>
Message-ID: <b3f0316a-4daa-87e6-e02e-cf693ca4d607@transpacket.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 15:21:25 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180305.145418.2010818875235650756.mbj@tail-f.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: nb
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/MuKjT85_NedhqDo9SiIsjkFC9s0>
Subject: Re: [netmod] choice/case in 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: Mon, 05 Mar 2018 14:21:29 -0000

On 03/05/2018 02:54 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:

> Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 02:14:26PM +0100, Vladimir Vassilev wrote:
>>> On 03/05/2018 01:50 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
>>>
>>>> I prefer that the choice/case nodes do not have any flags since they
>>>> are not having a config true/false property on their own. And less
>>>> clutter is better.
>>> 'choice' statements have 'config' substatement while 'case' do not. I myself
>>> figured that out while I was implementing tree diagrams support.
>>>
>>> I would prefer the current pyang output and a change to the yang-tree
>>> document to specify that nodes without config substatement do not have
>>> <flags>.
>>>
>> So it seems the running code got it right. ;-)
> As the author of that code, I think that was purely by accident...
>
> But I'm not convinced it is the correct solution.  We have one example
> in the other thread where someone was confused by the "rw" flag and
> thought that it implied that the node would be present in the data
> tree.
+1. There are indeed very few 'config false;' statements in 'choice's in 
use and they do not justify the clutter and confusion of 'choice' 
representations in all tree diagrams. With that clarification I am not 
against the change specified in alternative 2.

Vladimir
> /martin