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
