> On 22 May 2015, at 16:11, Andy Bierman <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:37 AM, Martin Bjorklund <[email protected]> wrote: >> Ladislav Lhotka <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Martin Bjorklund <[email protected]> writes: >>> >>>> Andy, >>>> >>>> I don't think the implementation burden on the server is that heavy. >>>> A YANG 1.0 compliant server today supports: >>>> >>>> leaf a in module A of type foo from foo@2001-01-01 >>>> leaf b in module B of type foo from foo@2002-02-02 >>> >>> In fact, the same can be done in two submodules of the same module, or >>> main module and submodule, which leads exactly to the situation below - >>> and that's allowed even in YANG 1.0. >> >> Yes, you're right! Which makes the current MUST NOT more of a CLR. >> > > Completely wrong because each submodule is its own context and you > cannot combine > multiple revisions of any module in any 1 submodule. All XPath and other > statements in the submodule will only be using 1 revision of any of the > submodules or modules it can access.
This looks like your wishful thinking - the CLR in section 7.1.5 is totally unqualified, and my interpretation is that it’s meant for the text of a single module or submodule because an import in one submodule doesn’t apply to other submodules nor the main module. Moreover, I can easily combine *groupings and typedefs* from multiple revisions. For everything else, including XPath, the revisions are irrelevant. Lada > > >> >> /martin > > Andy -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
