Hi,
The -19 has an issue that the YANG module descriptions are not updated
w.r.t. what we have in the repository!
Just as an example, the dual "revision" statement which was merged does
not show up in -19. And there's more.
I've now added a few more PRs to close the remaining open issues I saw.
I believe all open PRs should be addressed before sending the document
onward. That would also close all open Github issues.
In particular, for the SID allocation tables the '...' notation needs to
be defined (see PR).
And the module SID allocations would be nice to repeat in the table too
- no need to exclude there.
When submitting the -20, we should check that the changes made in the
YANG module actually propagate to the draft text to be uploaded.
regards
Esko
On 4-12-2025 23:34, Michael Richardson wrote:
I've merged your PR with the Capitalization fixed.
The result is -19, posted yesterday I think. It has more diffs than I'd like
as a result, but thank you! Thank you. Thank you!
If there is a ignore-case option for iddiff/rfcdiff it's not obvious.
If someone wants, I could try to do a diff against a mutated version.
I wonder what the RPC will do with Capitalized terms in the Abstract.
I did edit the YANG slightly in my copy so that RFC8792 wrapping would not be
needed. I think that it's ready for going up to AD.
Esko Dijk<[email protected]> wrote:
mcr> I prefer that all the terms from our Terminology section be
Capitalized.
mcr> This makes it easier to be clear that they are our terms.
mcr> We already have DNS people getting confused about Domain and
Registrar.
mcr> I thought that the other terms had been fixed, but I guess not.
> Yes, also works for me - I've updated the editorial PR with a second
commit that uses Uppercase (Capitalized) terms from our list of terms.
> I do have to say that most IETF documents use far less Capitalized terms
than we do now (if this PR would be applied).
> I'm open to any suggestions here if people think this needs improvement.
The RFC Editor could also take that up later.
>https://github.com/anima-wg/voucher/pull/90
(https://github.com/anima-wg/voucher/pull/90)
> 4) use single quotes ('example', 'signerInfo', ... ) for referring to
literal
> field names
> Fair enough.
> I think that backquote (`example`) also creates a useful fixed-font
markup,
> particularly in HTML.
> To support both txt and HTML rendering, I've applied single quotes and
also backtick. If we don't like that I can easily do regexp based search/replace
to make it backtick-only.
> That looks better in HTML, but the txt rendering gets more confusing to
read.
> Esko
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Alternatives:
> ----------------------------------------------------
--
Michael Richardson<[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
--
*IoTconsultancy.nl* | Email/Teams: [email protected] | +31 6
2385 8339
_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
