Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Alexander Clemm <alexander.clemm@huawei.com>
wrote:

> I do have a question re: the rationale that is given in the document: "
> Today's Common practice is include the definition of the syntax used   to
> represent a YANG module in every document that provides a tree diagram.
> This practice has several disadvantages and the purpose of   the document
> is to provide a single location for this definition. "
>
> I am not sure how much simplification this will really bring - is the
> boilerplate paragraph we find in drafts with YANG tree diagrams today
> really that a big problem, specifically while the snippet is still small
> enough (and could arguably even be generated by pyang itself, if extended
> accordingly, for easy pasting into drafts)?  While having a common and
> consistent definition in a central location is appreciated, one implication
> as the tree notation evolves will be that documents may now have to be
> specific as to which notation revision is used (as the notation might be
> updated, revisions might need to be maintained, although it is understood
> that churn will be kept to a minimum).
>
>

I think the idea is that the current practice of including a terminology
section for
YANG tree diagrams would stop.  Instead, there will be an Informative
reference
to the YANG tree diagram RFC. Then YANG tree diagrams can appear in the
document
matching the syntax in the tree diagrams RFC.

I support the new RFC and also the idea that these diagrams need to be
consistent to have value for YANG readers.  I do not like the current
ad-hoc practice or reinventing the syntax in each RFC that uses a tree
diagram.

> --- Alex
>

Andy

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: netmod [mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Kent Watsen
> Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 4:23 PM
> To: netmod@ietf.org
> Cc: netmod-chairs@ietf.org
> Subject: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-bjorklund-netmod-yang-
> tree-diagrams
>
> All,
>
> This is start of a two-week poll on making the following draft a NETMOD
> working group document:
>
>   draft-bjorklund-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams
>
> Please send email to the list indicating "yes/support" or "no/do not
> support".  If indicating no, please state your reservations with the
> document.  If yes, please also feel free to provide comments you'd like to
> see addressed once the document is a WG document.
>
>
> Thank you,
> NETMOD WG Chairs
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>