On 05/04/2022 00:34, Robert Varga wrote:
On 04/04/2022 13:48, Jernej Tuljak wrote:
> If both "leaf" data nodes are instantiated (XML encoding) as
part of <rpc> for "foo", does <x> come before or after <y> (in
document order)?
Augmented-in nodes come after other nodes.
Maybe this is an implementation convention, but the RFC says they
are encoded in any order.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7950#section-7.17.2
You are referring to this:
When a node is augmented, the augmenting child nodes are encoded as
subelements to the augmented node, in any order.
This implies interleaving of augmenting and non-augmenting child
nodes within "input" parameters for XML encoding?
Yes. There is no semantic difference in directly-defined on augmenting
nodes, especially in 'uses/augment' case -- they share the same
namespace, so at the document level (i.e. effective model) there is no
difference between the two.
Any ordering should be treated as an implementation artifact. In
particular this declaration:
rpc foo {
grouping foo {
container foo {
leaf foo {
type string;
}
}
}
input {
uses foo {
augment foo {
leaf bar {
type uint8;
}
}
}
}
}
is completely equivalent to:
rpc foo {
input {
container foo {
leaf bar {
type uint8;
}
leaf foo {
type string;
}
}
}
}
The presence of the intermediate grouping is a pure module-internal
modeling detail. I believe introducing/removing the grouping is a
non-breaking change as per RFC6020 (if memory serves right).
Module updating rules state this:
o Any set of data definition nodes may be replaced with another set
of syntactically and semantically equivalent nodes. For example,
a set of leafs may be replaced by a "uses" statement of a grouping
with the same leafs.
and this:
In statements that have any data definition statements as
substatements, those data definition substatements MUST NOT be
reordered.
Can you state that your second example may be rewritten into your first
one while retaining semantic equivalence? For the second example, it is
clear that XML encoding for that container imposes ordering on <bar> and
<foo> (in that order), for the first, this is no longer true.
Jernej
Regards,
Robert
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
netmod@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
