On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 09:38:53AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: > Hi, > > I want to resolve this issue because it affects RESTCONF and idnits > > https://github.com/netmod-wg/rfc6087bis/issues/37 > > The new proposal is to get rid of EXAMPLE BEGINS in the draft. > id-nits MUST NOT complain about example modules. > Only YANG wrapped in <CODE BEGINS> <CODE ENDS> > is subject to idnits.
I think we should distinguish a) regular modules that - usually have a module name starting with ietf- - must be marked with <CODE BEGINS> <CODE ENDS> - must be validated using --ietf and - should generate errors during idnits processing b) example modules that - usually have a module name starting with ietf- - must be marked with <CODE BEGINS> <CODE ENDS> - may be validated without using strict -ietf checks - may lead to warnings during idnits processing c) code snippets that - often written to highlight a certain feature and may be incomplete - do not have to follow any specific rules - may have modules names starting with example- - are not subject to automated extraction and validation The purpose of the <CODE BEGINS> <CODE ENDS> markup is to allow automated extraction of code components out of an RFC. It should not be overloaded with additional semantics and we should not create variations of this convention to express additional semantics. The fact that a module is an example is encoded in the module name - this makes sure the information stays with the module. /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
