On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 10:22:43AM -0700, Andy Bierman wrote: > > The draft already distinguishes between these 3 cases >
Good. Then I am happy. > > 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 > > The problem with (b) is that the copyright for IETF Trust applies. > CODE BEGINS should be for normative modules. > I don't think the example-jukebox module loses its value because > there is no fake "contact" info in the module. > > Examples MAY pass "pyang --ietf" checking but this is not required > Who made <CODE BEGINS> <CODE ENDS> imply copyright? This should be fixed. The copyright is usually stated in the module's description statement - and this is where it should be stated. The <CODE BEGINS> <CODE ENDS> mechanism was designed as a markup for tools to allow automated extraction - no more and no less. Can we please avoid overloading this with additional semantics? /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
