Re: [yang-doctors] automating yang doctor reviews

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

On 4/23/2018 10:25 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> Kent,
>
> it seems that many of us manage several artefacts while producing an
> I-D (that is the .xml that is then rendered as an I-D).
>
> a) YANG modules
> b) derived artefacts such as tree diagrams
> c) examples snippets (XML or JSON)
> d) source of textual information (growing variety of formats used here)
> e) tooling to validate examples and YANG modules
> f) tooling to produce .xml out of a)-d)
>
> What you are proposing, if I understand correctly, is to extend the
> xml2rfc vocabulary such that we can reverse step f), at least
> partially, to extract a) and c) out of the xml2rfc format and perhaps
> generate b) automatically from a) and then do e) within the IETF
> infrastructure. I am not sure I am excited about turning a document
> markup format (xml2rfc) into a general container format and perhaps
> also into a (scriptable) data transformation format. (But yes, it
> sound much better than what we do today, extracting artefacts out of
> rendered and paginated text.)
>
> Perhaps things could be simpler if authors would be able to submit all
> pieces that make up an I-D as separate artefacts instead of first
> inlining all of the artefacts in some xml2rfc container format and
> then extracting them again out of this format to feed tool chains.
Exactly.
That way, we could add more example snippets, even after the publication.

Regards, Benoit
>
> The whole idea that a document is a single file using a single format
> really feels somewhat odd these days. (Well, it already felt odd when
> people were writing MIB modules and the RFC editor used nroff or plain
> text to start their editing. The pain isn't new, just coming along in
> a different flavor.)
>
> Perhaps all we need is a proper sourcecode include mechanism and a
> submission tool that allows to submit multiple artefacts so we do not
> need to first inline everything into xml2rfc and then extract things
> out of it again.
>
> /js
>
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 06:40:30PM +0000, Kent Watsen wrote:
>> anyone interested in this draft?  (draft attached in my previous message)
>>
>> /kw
>>
>>
>> ===== original message =====
>>
>> Doctors,
>>
>> Here's a stab at how we might automate the basic parts of a YANG Doctor review, something I've mentioned wanting at the YD-lunch meeting at the last two IETF meetings.
>>
>> I'll be the first to say that this proposal has issues, but hopefully it's in the ballpark, and we can finish it off together, assuming there is interest in bringing it forward at all...
>>
>> Note, I assume that this document will be AD-sponsored, just like RFC 7991 was, hence why the draft name is what it is.
>>
>> Kent
>>   
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> yang-doctors mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/yang-doctors