--On April 15, 2008 13:30:01 -0700 IESG Secretary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> NETCONF Data Modeling Language (netmod)
I support the creation of this WG.
> 2. The YANG data modeling language and semantics (proposed
> standard)
...
> 5. Mapping rules of YANG to DSDL data modeling framework (ISO/I
Andrew G. Malis wrote:
> Thomas,
>
> I would personally find this more useful if it were measured by
> subject line rather than by sender.
>
>
At the time when these summaries started, it was obvious from some
summaries that some participants seemed to be spending more time typing
answers than
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 09:41:33PM +0300,
Hannes Tschofenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
a message of 46 lines which said:
> Rather than providing these types of summaries it would make more
> sense to provide a conclusion of the individual discussions. This,
> btw, often does not happen in workin
Chris Newman writes:
>The simpler (5)
>happens to be, the more confident I will become that YANG is following best
>practices for XML DMLs.
My guess is the opposite: many of the more useful features of XSD
and DSDL require distinct and uncomfortable layout of the schema
material. For example,
Harald,
My thinking is that many of us (well, at least me) don't have enough
time to read everything single email or thread on the ietf list ...
but if it turns out that a particular thread that I've been ignoring
has generated a lot of mail this past week, then maybe it's worth it
to go back to c
All three categories are absolutely needed.
It is self evident, although unfortunate, that the "accepted" category
will be used.
Even after WG, IESG, IETF LC, and the RFC editor, some errors make it
through.
>From my experience with RFC errata, the "rejected" category will also
definitely be u
Stephane,
On 2008-04-22 03:04, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 09:41:33PM +0300,
> Hannes Tschofenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> a message of 46 lines which said:
>
>> Rather than providing these types of summaries it would make more
>> sense to provide a conclusion of the
The dir="" is not really intended to specify that the direction is not
known but that the direction has not been specified explicitly. For
instance, in an aggregate feed containing entries from multiple sources,
the original entries may or may not have contained the bidi attribute.
Because of
My apologies for not getting back to this sooner. Comments below.
Frank Ellermann wrote:
> James M Snell wrote:
>
>> If another version of the draft is needed based on
>> last-call comments, I can make the name change then.
>
> Leave it alone, please. Various tools have problems
> with tracki
