>> I still don't know what it means to define hierarchical data and say the
>> parent is deprecated but not the descendant nodes.
>
> It is odd but can happen anyway. A current augmentation of something
> that got deprecated likely stays current. I would hope that tools warn
> if they see this but that's it.
This example seems to provide support for saying status should be
inherited. But, to be clear, you agree that if a parent is deprecated,
than its decedents should be deprecated as well, right?
>> This is rather non-intuitive, as is the idea that all descendant
>> nodes need to be manually edited (status is not inherited).
>
> Not a big deal. The benefit is that a reader like me knows clear that
> the definition I am look at is deprecated, no need to search backwards
> to find out.
tree diagrams do this too, though I like Martin's approach of removing
the deprecated -state trees from the tree diagram altogether.
>> It also means the objects expanded from groupings cannot ever be
>> changed (clearly a bug in YANG).
>
> Yes, bug in YANG.
Is this the same issue I raised?
import ietf-foo {
prefix f;
}
container bar {
uses f:foo;
}
container baz {
status deprecated;
uses f:foo; <-- oops, descendants not deprecated!
} (not a problem if status inherited)
K.
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
