On 03/05/2018 02:54 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 02:14:26PM +0100, Vladimir Vassilev wrote:
On 03/05/2018 01:50 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
I prefer that the choice/case nodes do not have any flags since they
are not having a config true/false property on their own. And less
clutter is better.
'choice' statements have 'config' substatement while 'case' do not. I myself
figured that out while I was implementing tree diagrams support.
I would prefer the current pyang output and a change to the yang-tree
document to specify that nodes without config substatement do not have
<flags>.
So it seems the running code got it right. ;-)
As the author of that code, I think that was purely by accident...
But I'm not convinced it is the correct solution. We have one example
in the other thread where someone was confused by the "rw" flag and
thought that it implied that the node would be present in the data
tree.
+1. There are indeed very few 'config false;' statements in 'choice's in
use and they do not justify the clutter and confusion of 'choice'
representations in all tree diagrams. With that clarification I am not
against the change specified in alternative 2.
Vladimir
/martin
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
