Re: [netmod] WG Last Call: draft-ietf-netmod-schema-mount-07

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 05:38:40PM +0000, Robert Wilton wrote:
> 
> > > > > 3. Sec 2.1 Glossary of New Terms:  "Schema" isn't actually defined
> > > > > anywhere (RFC 7950 doesn't define this).  Should it be defined here?
> > > > > The NMDA datastores draft had a similar issue and we choose to define
> > > > > "datastore schema" instead.
> > > > I think the right place for defining the term "schema" (and "data model"
> > > > as well) is the specification of YANG because it is desirable that all
> > > > documents related to YANG use the same meaning.
> > > OK, 7950 doesn't define it today.  Is that a problem?
> > "Schema tree" and "schema node" are defined and used a lot in 7950, so
> > it might be good to define "schema" as well - meaning the schema tree
> > with all associated semantics.
> OK, but we can't add definitions to 7950 now.  Would it make sense to add
> the definition to the NMDA draft and reference that?

So what is the difference between "schema tree" and "schema"? Or to
put it differently, what is "all associated semantics" that you are
adding to a "schema tree" to obtain a "schema"? RFC 7950 says:

   o  schema tree: The definition hierarchy specified within a module.

If I understand 'definition hierarchy' correctly, than it seems
"schema" is just an abbreviation of "schema tree", i.e., there is no
semantic difference between these two terms. If there is a difference,
we need to be able to spell it out.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>