Re: [netmod] Call for adoption request of draft-kwatsen-netmod-artwork-folding-04

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Wed, 27 June 2018 04:07 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@huawei.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 0E31D12785F for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 21:07:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-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 KkQJWlltw7fk for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 21:07:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67BBB124BE5 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 21:07:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from LHREML711-CAH.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.106]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id D6CCADD1FBAC4 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 05:07:10 +0100 (IST)
Received: from NKGEML414-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.75) by LHREML711-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.382.0; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 05:07:11 +0100
Received: from NKGEML513-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.193]) by nkgeml414-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.75]) with mapi id 14.03.0382.000; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 12:07:06 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>, "kwatsen@juniper.net" <kwatsen@juniper.net>
CC: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] Call for adoption request of draft-kwatsen-netmod-artwork-folding-04
Thread-Index: AQHUCpK0us9UwwoDtU2EaBoFZiTowKRx1OgAgAB01oCAABo9gIAAB6+AgAAL34CAAQrgYA==
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 04:07:05 +0000
Message-ID: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA9AEB8C66@nkgeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <34C78C9F-57A9-4234-8F30-39F69F0B2F04@juniper.net> <20180626.205807.1642470222068426969.mbj@tail-f.com> <21CFADF6-9FB8-4B0B-A7FC-517FDDAF6F8C@juniper.net> <20180626.220807.1407068226011761897.mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <20180626.220807.1407068226011761897.mbj@tail-f.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.138.33.244]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/cVixbTncI5egwvY5mssPrO1z-No>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Call for adoption request of draft-kwatsen-netmod-artwork-folding-04
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
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, 27 Jun 2018 04:07:16 -0000

-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Martin Bjorklund [mailto:mbj@tail-f.com] 
发送时间: 2018年6月27日 4:08
收件人: kwatsen@juniper.net
抄送: Qin Wu; netmod@ietf.org
主题: Re: [netmod] Call for adoption request of draft-kwatsen-netmod-artwork-folding-04

Kent Watsen <kwatsen@juniper.net>; wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > (The exmaples with just a string of '\' are highy confusing.  
> > Unclear what they try to tell me... probably that the alg is much 
> > more difficult than I originally thought ;-)
> 
> Those are torture tests, but they due illustrate the one case where 
> having the '\\n' on the fold column would've been illegal input (and hence the '\'
> was replaced with a 'x').  Great for internal algorithm validation, 
> but perhaps unnecessary for the example in the text.  Or maybe enhance 
> the comments above these lines to explain why they're there?

I suggest you remove this.

> See below for more comments.
> 
> 
> 
> >>> I really liked the flexible indentation in the other draft.  I 
> >>> suggest it is added to this draft.  It enhances readability (if 
> >>> the author wants it).
> >> 
> >> Variable indentation, when the folded-line starts on same column as 
> >> the previous line, looks nice.  The current 
> >> yang-xml-doc-conventions draft has a fixed two-space indent, which 
> >> would only look nice sometimes while introducing a surprise factor other times.
> >
> > Hmm, I thought it had variable-length indentation.
> 
> It was, but removed later, I think from WG comments.   Qin may know more.
> 
> 
> >> Variable indent introduces significant complexity; at least, it's 
> >> beyond what can be accomplished by a `sed` one-liner, such as in 
> >> the current draft.  A fixed two-space indent is possible (easy), 
> >> but zero-space indent is more common (less surprising) than a fixed indent.
> >
> > I like the algorithm in the other draft better - it had variable 
> > placement of the line break ("\\n" sequence), and variable 
> > indentation.
> 
> How can you automated variable placement of the line-break, assuming 
> no awareness of the file format?  Additionally, be aware that variable '\n'
> placement would necessitate pre-scanning the file to ensure *no* line 
> ends in a '\\n', as opposed to just the lines that need folding.

I envision this format being used not just by a program, but also by humans trying to construct nice looking examples.

Also, I would prefer a description of the format, rather than of one algorithm that produces the format.

[Qin]: Tend to agree with this.

> > Note that your proposed format is just a special case of the format 
> > in the other draft, so you can still use your "one-liner" sed to 
> > produce your result.
> 
> True.
> 
> 
> >> >>   - handle two special case on backslash and space at the end of broken
> >> >>     line in yang-xml-doc-conventions.
> >> >>   - propose to use <WRAPPED TEXT BEGIN><WRAPPED TEXT END> to extract
> >> >>     artwork from I-Ds.
> >> >
> >> > The artwork draft proposes only a header, which means that it is 
> >> > not quite clear where the artwork ends.
> >> 
> >> Interesting point, but I think that artwork-framing is a different 
> >> problem from artwork-folding.  If the goal is to support extracting 
> >> artwork from txt-based RFC scripts, regardless if the artwork is 
> >> folded or not, then we could level-up this draft to that role, while still supporting folding.
> >> 
> >> If we were to add a footer, maybe something like this:
> >> 
> >>   ===padding=== End Folding per BCP XX (RFC XXXX) ===padding===
> >> 
> >> where the "padding" fills in '=' characters until the max-line 
> >> width is reached (same as how the header is done).
> >
> > Ok.
> 
> I assume that you're okay-ing the proposed footer, but the real 
> question is if we should expand the scope of this draft to include artwork-framing also?

I think I would prefer if there is also a footer.

> >> >> In the artwork draft, section 5.3, you write:
> >> >>
> >> >>   This line is self-describing in
> >> >>   three ways: use of '\' character, identification of BCP/RFC, and
> >> >>   identification of what the maximum line length is for the artwork.
> >> >>
> >> > I was confused about this maximum line length; it seems you 
> >> > define the maximum line length ot be 53, but that seems too 
> >> > limiting, and indeed in the example in 5.4 the max line length is 69.  (BTW, the example is
> >> > missing in the draft, as is the shell script in Appendix A).   In any
> >> > case, I don't see how the header identifies the max line length.
> >> 
> >> The draft says that the *minimal* header string is 53-characters).  
> >> We can make it less if needed, but it involves needing to fold the 
> >> header itself, which could become messy.  Thoughts?
> >> 
> >> Per the line just before the one quoted above, this line is '=' 
> >> padded on both sides until reaching the max value.  Apparently, 
> >> this isn't clear enough in the text, or do you think it's okay now?
> >
> > The draft says:
> >
> >  The header is two lines long.
> >
> >  The first line is the following 53-character string
> >
> > This is what made me confused.  I now understand that the idea is to 
> > pad with '='.
> 
> Right, the full sentence is:
> 
>    The first line is the following 53-character string that has been
>    padded with roughly equal numbers of equal ('=') characters to reach
>    the artwork's maximum line length.
> 
> So, leave as is for now?

Well ... I don't think this text is even correct...  The section describes the header with the first line being 53 characters.  But that is just an example.  Maybe:

    The first line is an N-character string on the following form:

    === NOTE: '\' line wrapping per BCP XX (RFC XXXX) ===

    where N is the artwork's maximum length (the minimum length is
    53).  The string is padded with roughly equal numbers of equal
    ('=') characters in the beginning and end to reach the artwork's
    maximum line length.



... but as I wrote, I'd prefer a variable-length format.

[Qin]: Good, Variable-length format can be supported by the script provided by draft-wu-netmod-yang-xml-doc-conventions-05.

/martin


> 
> 
> 
> > But if we adopt the algorithm in the other draft, we don't need a 
> > maximum line length like this.
> 
> There still needs to be a maximum line length, whether it's identified 
> in the header could be discussed.
> 
> 
> 
> > /martin
> 
> Kent
> 
> 
>