I have a question about “when” and mandatory objects.
It seems to me that the implemented semantics of “when” are really “optional
when”, in that the enclosing object can be absent even though it is mandatory
and the “when” clause holds true.
The RFC could be clearer about this.
Example
leaf color {
enumeration {
enum “blue”;
enum “black”;
}
mandatory true;
}
container foo {
when ../color = ‘blue’;
etc.
}
“foo” is optional due to the presence of the “when” statement even though the
object is mandatory (same is true for mandatory leaf, min-elements=1 list etc.).
This is considered valid XML for the above
<color>blue</color>
In my view this makes conditionally variant schemas “loose” in their
enforcement (some scenarios can use choice but it doesn’t cover everything).
I think that mandatory should be respected for the enclosing objects of a
“when” statement.
That is, a mandatory object must be present when its “when” clause holds true
and a Schematron statement should enforce that.
What is the rationale behind the current YANG rules behavior, that the “when”
Schematron mapping doesn’t check for presence of the enclosing mandatory object?
thanks
Mike Rehder
“Amdocs’ email platform is based on a third-party, worldwide, cloud-based
system. Any emails sent to Amdocs will be processed and stored using such
system and are accessible by third party providers of such system on a limited
basis. Your sending of emails to Amdocs evidences your consent to the use of
such system and such processing, storing and access”.
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
