On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 4:32 AM Normen Kowalewski <[email protected]> wrote:
> Paul, Lada, > > > On the comment for the wording in the line after the example in 3 > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-iana-class-type-yang-00#section-3>. > YANG Design Considerations > > typedef dns-class-name { > type enumeration { > enum IN { > value 1; > description > "Internet (IN)"; > reference > "RFC 1035 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1035>"; > } > ... > } > } > > The other type, "rr-type-name", is exactly analogical. > > > Maybe we could use the wording > > The definitions for the other basic type, "rr-type-name” are derived in > analogy to this structure, except that the IANA registry "Resource Record > (RR) TYPEs” is the respective underlying data source. > > > BR, Normen > > > The other type, "rr-type-name", is exactly analogical. > > I'm not sure if "analogical" is a common word to use and might be a bit > confusing to non-native speakers like me. I'm also confused about > "exactly analogical". What would inexactly analogical be? :) > > > Being another non-native speaker, I am open to suggestions > > > "analogous" is a more common form of the word, and could be used. Or a synonym like "parallel" or "similarly". -- Bob Harold
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
