> On Sep 9, 2025, at 8:26 AM, Rob Wilton (rwilton) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Deliberate, perhaps, but wrong, imo :-) > I don’t think that using leaves instead of leafs would have affected clarity > of the text. Perhaps if leaf was an acronym for something else using a > different plural would have been justified.
I agree and the usage of "leafs" has a tendency to break one's train of thought.... Thanks, Acee > > Even copilot thinks that we should be using leaves, and I’m not aware of > other cases in general computer science literature on data structures that > use leafs rather than leaves. It seems to just be a YANG thing … > > Kind regards, > Rob > From: Jan Lindblad <[email protected]> > Date: Saturday, 6 September 2025 at 23:22 > To: Andy Bierman <[email protected]> > Cc: NetMod WG <[email protected]> > Subject: [netmod] Re: leafs > Andy, > I can assure you this is completely intentional. IMHO this is a > misunderstanding based on the false assumption that a biological tree leaf == > datastructure YANG leaf. These are two different kinds of concepts that > happen to have the same spelling of one of their grammatical forms, but are > actually different words that conjugate differently. > This kind of differentiation makes sense in (computer) science text, since > adhering to traditional grammar rules would often make technical text less > understandable/precise. In Python we talk about trys, defs, ifs and elses. In > YANG discussions we often talk about when constructs in such a way that half > a page turns red with wavy grammar underlines. And we aren't going to > titlecase the names of symbols in the documentation just because english > grammar requires it. Imagine a man page about Fopen() or Str() or Show > Interfaces. > Best Regards, > /jan > It was pointed out to me that RFC 8407bis spells the word "leaves" > incorrectly (15 times). > My answer was that it is trying to be consistent with RFC 7950 (31 times), > which started > in RFC 6020 (27 times). > Does anybody remember why the WG went with an incorrect plural of "leaf" in > RFC 6020? > Obviously, it cannot be changed now, but maybe this was intentional, and the > reasoning is documented. > From google: > Note: "Leafs" is sometimes used as the plural form in proper nouns, such as > the Toronto Maple Leafs hockey team, but it is not the general plural of the > noun "leaf". > Andy > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
