On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 01:44:11PM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > >> > - Does the presence of an annotation impact the JSON encoding rules > >> > that control when a module name prefix is needed or not? I assume > >> > the answer is 'no' but it is not clear from the text. > >> > >> Bullet #1 in sec. 4.2 says this. > > > > I did not find the two bullets clear enough. The second bullet says: > > > > 2. Namespaces of metadata annotations are encoded in the same way as > > namespaces of YANG data node instances, see > > [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-json]. > > > > This leaves it up for interpretation whether this means just the > > syntax or whether this also refers to the rules when namespaces must > > be included. The first bullet did not help me to understand this > > For annotations in JSON, the namespace ID (module name) must always be > included in their name, and annotations are essentially leaves so they > cannot participate in any "namespace switching". And bullet #1 says > encoding of other nodes is unaffected by the presence of annotations. > > > either, hence I asked the question. I love to have more explicit text, > > perhaps even an example (if I have two annotations 'a' and 'b' defined > > in one module and another annotation 'c' defined in a second module > > together with a leaf 'd', what are the possible namespace combinations > > I will get if I reorder the annotations?). > > I don't understand. Do you mean reordering within a single "metadata object"? > The order of its members is irrelevant, and all members must have an > explicit namespace.
OK. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
