Re: [netmod] Use XML namespaces in YANG document examples

[tom petch <[e-mail]>]

Trimming the cc:

From: Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>
Sent: 10 February 2022 12:43

On 2022-02-10, at 13:22, tom petch <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> If the comments in question had been made at the time of RFC7950 they would have been most insightful; now they are not IMHO.

The comment is insightful, it is just not about this document.
I think we need to be able to sort comments into the right bins.
(And we need to formalize “Hold for document update” bins for non-errata.)

(I’m also still not sure I’ve got an answer to my question about using inconsistent prefixes between YANG and the XML example.  What is being demonstrated here?)

<tp>
If you are referring to
" Is there a reason to violate the SHOULD?"
I did not see that as related to the thread but thought it was answered anyway by Juergen.  As he said, the SHOULD gets violated when prefix clash which, in the absence of a registry, a namespace, for prefix is possible. Within the IETF we ought to be able to avoid clashes although good hygiene, like not using two letter prefix helps but there is a world of YANG out there most of which we likely know little of.

But the thread was about where prefix may be used and Tim was proposing a different prefix  in the XML content.  XML defined a namespace for identifiers using a URI, which is clunky, so like many specifications, a short form is created, the prefix, with a mapping thereto.  The question then is where is it permissible to use the short form, where the mapping will be understood.  I have not looked at the language specification lately but the quotes from it in this thread suggested that it is ok in entity and attribute but not in XML content and needs redefining there except that this is YANG and this is identityref and any parser that does not understand the nature of identityref is a lost cause.  

But that is at the limit of my understanding (until I re-read the XML specification).  I am clear that I think that we are ok with what we are doing and should not start introducing new boiler plate for future examples of YANG.

Tom Petch

Grüße, Carsten