Re: [netmod] stable reference for tree diagram notation

Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> Wed, 08 March 2017 19:15 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 1F553129464 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 11:15:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 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_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yumaworks-com.20150623.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 ZQx5EO97E-Iz for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 11:14:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22f.google.com (mail-wm0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22f]) (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 E9FBE1294B1 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 11:14:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id n11so39075944wma.0 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 11:14:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yumaworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/oyGEeP2ubwoSYmSW6DnLafpD+eVd+ZkXTST6ZSMTcY=; b=rK2MlHtyP2V9AFeGEawUxexkJpFfTfnktsDFfXe46lCfmJYkfv1kXYElW+Bj6ddIVB xIBQi1NWWFdXyvY4S+mX6HPbY9jpy28Xf+F0KZGgHFD0R8/4zB+UGRApaCdYY/if8uVQ zQZd+5WcKUrFpnA0nhE91ScXal4L4ICWEVO5o3IJb+3SW0ix4Pwa/EoCusF15zXhyKaD CiG8KEJTGKbaYgmiibbyh6Gg281YzZdeY6bmWesHOG7wwMR6fjMv1fypFEAEqF7DZ4Y5 pAaa79nbl5gB5grxaLR24WRMJzZcv0ffRUVDBq8gjzIkzUoMde33P656cd6GR6Nh8Fug 7XNw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/oyGEeP2ubwoSYmSW6DnLafpD+eVd+ZkXTST6ZSMTcY=; b=S71FCf1S9TgeClSvS3uDkJZGWWzp6euPtrI9lODh6YFPcU7on87EN0aA4UFaZ94dy3 p5mT3eFhQnFHOF9z8GaBjjBruGd6TG1gdJuxOPdZ6UHjE8LLniBACqsxbGjEOYvfCzxp /QVQUMaCUrk4dagEbZuaPopXdtzHm6cBFE0+0Ty9NAPLYmQV2hRSmznbZqfxkOV/oZO+ uQTtDxf5mrBeSmbvUvKODUJm98TevPl02RkZ6wJNkHJxqa90WzRNgkCbNS7YOdTcgTDO KEiT2rOvzwiFeWixk1O1BB1+Ah6k/VfdDWaV0rw8r6GkleIVQtiomFGL3RZrHTbl4Sy0 L+bw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39n4QPzhIlBD29cENe1FuYXtyuL2Rhxoq7NiaVyGp3wU3pYvSU2/hsNA5XIS6/eu2i9UtPY02wHEUqGapA==
X-Received: by 10.28.103.3 with SMTP id b3mr23141763wmc.99.1489000497404; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 11:14:57 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.165.154 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 11:14:56 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <271CED23-8655-45A8-8E05-3ABD460871BD@juniper.net>
References: <EE43C03C-4660-4492-B40A-BAA17FD99A39@juniper.net> <20170303170233.GB3345@elstar.local> <20170307.185637.67261051570590747.mbj@tail-f.com> <82703e36-26f9-d459-c36a-c274861c5386@labn.net> <84583EEA-C7FE-4BB0-8D16-744E3768AB5C@nic.cz> <CABCOCHQaEAs039Tim6CWGg0h_cK1rcZo5DBS-Kko8j05UosZwQ@mail.gmail.com> <20170308180211.GA9937@elstar.local> <271CED23-8655-45A8-8E05-3ABD460871BD@juniper.net>
From: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 11:14:56 -0800
Message-ID: <CABCOCHRBKaLcPExQUNp0j1TVb0zh8hDtZkUG46XkymidpFA9hw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114a91b2b7fcf8054a3cf191
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/PjNFn2Ka66N_UcOYV-EbUKnog4o>
Cc: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netmod] stable reference for tree diagram notation
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 19:15:00 -0000

On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net> wrote:

>
>
>
> > I think we can allow both and leave it to the document author. Either
> > the author uses a well known tree format and refers to its definition
> > or the author uses a not yet well known tree format and then it has
> > to be defined inline:
>
> Nice compromise, but even then it would be helpful if a draft that wants
> to use some custom-annotations do so on top of a standard tree-diagram.
> So, for instance, the draft might say something like:
>
>   Tree diagrams used in this draft use notation described in
>   [RFCXXXX] with the following additional annotations:
>
>      @ - means ...
>      # - means ...
>      etc.
>
> This way, reader can focus more quickly on the diffs, but also this
> likely mimics what happened in reality (start with `pyang -f tree`
> and then manually edit from there).  What do you think?
>
>

YANG is supposed to be prioritized for readers, writers, and then
tool-makers.
As a reader of YANG modules, I do not want people creating their own
tree diagram syntax.  I prefer all tree diagrams use the same syntax.



> K.
>
>
>

Andy