Hi William,
> On 03 Feb 2016, at 09:58, William Ivory <wiv...@brocade.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > My colleagues and I are looking for clarification of the last point in > Section 10 of YANG 1.0: > > ‘ In statements that have any data definition statements as > substatements, those data definition substatements MUST NOT be > reordered.’ This was already discussed: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/CiVOMEDXfbQKKbgTXTznZh2HQQw My understanding was that the paragraph you cite would be modified in 6020bis, but apparently it hasn't been so far. I don't see any reason for insisting on the order of sibling data node definitions in configuration and state data since in instance documents the order is arbitrary in both XML and JSON encoding. > > We understand that existing statements must not be reordered in a new > revision of a YANG module, but we’re not clear if new statements may be > inserted between existing statements, or must always come at the ‘end’ of a > list or container definition. A specific example we’re concerned with is > where a grouping is used, and then later that grouping has an extra element > added, but the new node could also be added directly. Eg: > > Container foo { > Leaf A > Uses grouping B; > Leaf C > Leaf D > } > > Is it valid in a new revision of the module to do the following, or must the > order be A, B, C, D, E? What if grouping B has gained a new statement? > > Container foo { > Leaf A > Uses grouping B; > Leaf C > Leaf E < ---- ADDED > Leaf D > } I think this is allowed in any case. Lada > > Thanks, > > William > > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
