On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 1:00 PM Juergen Schoenwaelder < j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 09:23:01AM -0800, Andy Bierman wrote: > > > > IMO the RFC has a lot of room for improvement in this area: > > > > - the term "data node" is never defined but used 47 times > > - the term "data node identifier" is not defined or used > > - the term "schema node identifier" is defined and used 14 times > > (defined in sec. 3 Terminology and again in sec. 6.5) > > - every statement that uses some sort of path identifier (e.g. 9.9.2) > > needs to clearly specify > > whether the syntax is based on schema-node identifier or data-node > > identifier > > > > We either fix one thing at a time or we give up and hope for a better > future to arrive somehow. > > This is one thing : make it clear where the syntax includes choice/case identifiers and where it does not. The solutions I have seen so far for clarifying 9.9.2 do not do that. > /js > Andy > > -- > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <https://www.jacobs-university.de/> >
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
