On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder < [email protected]> wrote:
> 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? > > https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/copyright.html Note para 4 In addition to the code component types listed, *any text found between the markers <CODE BEGINS> and <CODE ENDS> shall be considered a code component.* Authors may wish to use these markers as clear delimiters of code components. > /js > > Andy > -- > 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
