Re: [netmod] draft netmod charter update proposal

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

On 3/1/2017 9:40 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 04:56:12PM +0000, Kent Watsen wrote:
>> Hi Lada,
>>
>> I understand your intention here, but I'm inclined to agree with others
>> that it's better to stick with the term we're using in the documents.
>> I'm open to the idea of changing the term used in our RFCs, and I believe
>> that such a change would likely have to begin with the YANG spec, from
>> which it could flow into other drafts.  With this in mind, I've added an
>> item to the yang-next tracker:
>>
>>    https://github.com/netmod-wg/yang-next/issues/17
>>
>> and I plan to revert this change in the charter text.
> Kent,
>
> there either is a decision and plan to change terminology everywhere
> or this proposal is in my view a no go. Right now, we seem to use
> consistent terminology everywhere - I do not want to loose this
> property lightly.
This consistency is an important feature of our documents set IMO.
And adding a sentence, somewhere, sometime, is easy: "the term encoding 
is also known as representation or serialization"

Regards, Benoit
>
> /js
>