Hi, Thanks for the review! Comments inline.
Robert Wilton <rwil...@cisco.com> wrote: > Hi Lou, Martin > > I've done a quick review of draft -04. > > It looks well written to me. > > I have a spotted a few minor nits/questions. > > Section 1: > > (i) "Such diagrams are commonly used to provided " => "Such diagrams > are used to provide"? Ok. > (ii) "This document provides the syntax used in YANG Tree Diagrams." > => "This document describes the syntax used in YANG Tree Diagrams", or > if not "describes", perhaps "specifies"? I changed to "describes". > (iii) "common practice is include" => "common practice is to include" Ok. > Section 2: > (iv) Are the top level data nodes really offset by 4 spaces, or should > this be 2 spaces? The example in section 2, and section 4 seem to > differ here. The submodule example in Sec 2.1 looks like it is using > 2 spaces. It should be 4 spaces. I fixed the example in 2.1. > (v) "is prefaces with" => "is prefaced with" Ok. > (vi) Section 2.2, should there be an example of an unexpanded uses > statement? I was wondering if this section was under specified? I have added: For example, the following diagram shows the "tls-transport" grouping from [RFC7407] unexpanded: +--rw tls +---u tls-transport If the grouping is expanded, it could be printed as: +--rw tls +--rw port? inet:port-number +--rw client-fingerprint? x509c2n:tls-fingerprint +--rw server-fingerprint? x509c2n:tls-fingerprint +--rw server-identity? snmp:admin-string > Section 2.6: > (vii) "If the node is augmented into the tree from another module, its > name is printed as <prefix>:<name>." Does there need to be a > clarification that the prefix name used is the one used by the > module's import statement? Or does it use the prefix statement from > the imported modules instead (I know that these should normally be the > same, but this is not guaranteed). Since this is used when a node is augmented *into* the main tree, it can't be the prefix in import, since the augmenting module is not imported from the augmented module. I did: OLD: If the node is augmented into the tree from another module, its name is printed as <prefix>:<name>. NEW: If the node is augmented into the tree from another module, its name is printed as <prefix>:<name>, where <prefix> is the prefix defined in the module where the node is defined. > Section 3.2. > (viii) It would be slightly easier to read if there wasn't a linebreak > between "--" and "tree-print-groupings", not sure if that is feasible > to force this. I don't think I can enforce this, but I'll look into it. If nothing else, the RFC editor will fix this. /martin > > Thanks, > Rob > > On 10/01/2018 16:16, joel jaeggli wrote: > > Just a reminder given the date that this was posted. This last call is > > expected to complete Monday 1/15/18. > > > > Thanks > > > > joel > > > > > > On 1/1/18 2:01 PM, joel jaeggli wrote: > >> Greetings, > >> > >> We hope the new year is a time to make great progess on outstanding > >> documents before preparation for the London IETF begins in earnest. > >> > >> This starts a two-week working group last call on: > >> > >> YANG Tree Diagrams > >> draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams > >> > >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams/ > >> > >> Please send email to the list indicating your support or concerns. > >> > >> We are particularly interested in statements of the form: > >> > >> * I have reviewed this draft and found no issues. > >> * I have reviewed this draft and found the following issues: ... > >> > >> > >> Thank you, > >> NETMOD WG Chairs > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > netmod mailing list > > netmod@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod > > . > > > _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod