Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-kwatsen-netmod-artwork-folding-08

Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-10-23 at 16:27 +0200, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2018-10-23 at 14:45 +0100, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > 1. I think you miss the point. While example XML/JSON YANG is included in
> > > > drafts, and while the authors are allowed to produce those drafts as txt
> > > > files,
> > > > or while the authors want to achieve pretty-to-read formatting, this work
> > > > falls
> > > > into the scope of those authors.
> > > 
> > > The folding of long lines should be done as the very last (automatic) step
> > > before the document gets published. Doing it earlier means that the source
> > code
> > > in this folded form can be (accidentally) further edited, which can lead to
> > > inconsistencies.
> > 
> > I will use folding e.g. for instance document examples in XML and
> > JSON.
> > 
> > My plan is to keep the example files with manually added breaks in my
> > repo, and as part of validation run a script that unfolds the
> > examples, and then validate the result.  The reason for this is that I
> > think readbility of the examples is important.
> 
> This seems backwards to me. If you need to edit such an example, you may have to
> remove the backslashes, reformat and insert them again.
> 
> If it's not possible to fold lines according to the syntax of a given language,
> I'd prefer to keep the original lines as long as possible and rely on an
> automatic procedure just before the final document is rolled out. 

Fortunately, the draft allows us both to work the way we prefer.

/martin

> 
> Lada  
> 
> > 
> > 
> > /martin
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > As long as the document is being moved around and edited, it would be better
> > to
> > > keep the source code untouched.
> > > 
> > > Lada
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 2. Yes, the authors discussed the <sourcecode> element and agreed that it
> > will
> > > > be in scope.
> > > > 
> > > > However, we are all sort of waiting for xml2rfc v3 and pending completion,
> > we
> > > > want to move this forward for v2 that is in use today.
> > > > 
> > > > (More than) Happy to come back and revisit this issue when v3 is deployed.
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Adrian
> > > > 
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ladislav
> > Lhotka
> > > > > Sent: 23 October 2018 14:24
> > > > > To: netmod@ietf.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: [netmod] WG adoption poll draft-kwatsen-netmod-artwork-
> > folding-
> > > > > 08
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Tue, 2018-10-23 at 14:40 +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I support the adoption.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Comments:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 1. My general feeling is that such technicalities should be handled by
> > > > > >    the RFC editor and/or tools rather than YANG module and RFC
> > authors.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 2. xml2rfc v3 introduced a new element, <sourcecode>, that is intended
> > > > > >    for source code inclusion. This document should therefore cover
> > this
> > > > > >    element as well (primarily?). One problem with it is that the
> > xml2rfc
> > > > > >    tool automatically adds the <CODE BEGINS> and <CODE ENDS> markers,
> > > > > >    which interferes with YANG convention specified in RFC 8407,
> > > > > >    sec. 3.2. I have already raised a question about this in the
> > > > > >    xml2rfc-dev mailing list.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Update: using the "name" attribute with <sourcecode> does the right
> > thing.
> > > > > 
> > > > >     <sourcecode name="ietf-foo@2016-03-20.yang">
> > > > >     ...
> > > > >     </sourcecode>
> > > > > 
> > > > > results in
> > > > > 
> > > > >     <CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-foo@2016-03-20.yang"
> > > > >     ...
> > > > >     <CODE ENDS>
> > > > > 
> > > > > Lada
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Lada
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> writes:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > All,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > This is start of a two week poll on making
> > > > > > > draft-kwatsen-netmod-artwork-folding-08 a working group
> > > > > > > document. 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.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > The poll ends Oct 1.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Lou (and co-chairs)
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > netmod mailing list
> > > > > > > netmod@ietf.org
> > > > > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> > > > > --
> > > > > Ladislav Lhotka
> > > > > Head, CZ.NIC Labs
> > > > > PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
> > > > > 
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > netmod mailing list
> > > > > netmod@ietf.org
> > > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> > > -- 
> > > Ladislav Lhotka
> > > Head, CZ.NIC Labs
> > > PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > netmod mailing list
> > > netmod@ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
> > > 
> -- 
> Ladislav Lhotka
> Head, CZ.NIC Labs
> PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67
> 