> On 21 Jul 2015, at 09:44, Juergen Schoenwaelder > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 09:16:46AM +0200, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >> >>> On 20 Jul 2015, at 23:00, Juergen Schoenwaelder >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Lada, >>> >>> Y34 is closed and I have not seen any new argument here that indicates >>> we made a major mistake with the resolution of Y34. As such, Y34 >>> remains closed. >> >> Of course, I was expecting this reaction. I think I did present *some* >> arguments, and I am leaving it to others to judge whether they are relevant >> or not. Even if it was a minor mistake, it is IMO still worth fixing. >> >>> >>> If you want to discuss new ideas to relocate or "symlink" data models, >>> please do so in a separate thread. (And no, we do not accept new >>> issues for YANG 1.1 either at this point in time.) >> >> It’s not about symlinks in the data tree but rather about a method for >> combining schemas that is complementary to “augment” - pull versus push. >> >> There is sufficient evidence that it was one of the use cases for “anydata”, >> e.g. in configlets. The gap in “anydata” definition for similar use cases is >> that it cannot specify a schema for its contents. >> > > Lada, you can't simply 'mount' a data model into a different place. > Think about paths in must or when expressions, or think about paths > contraints in leafrefs etc. And Y34 was not trying to solve this
This is a fair point but “anydata” where the schema is supplied somehow out of band faces the same issue. Lada > problem, so this discussion is IMHO under a misleading subject line. > > /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/> -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
