Ladislav Lhotka <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 2017-11-15 at 08:00 +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > Balazs Lengyel <[email protected]> wrote: > > > See bellow! > > > > > > > > > On 2017-11-15 05:22, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > > > > In XML land, this is mostly a change of the namespace (not of the > > > > prefix) if one keeps the same structure, no? In JSON land, the change > > > > of the module name more directly becomes visible in instance data; but > > > > this is all encoding details. > > > > > > BALAZS: Even in XMLland we store the prefix as part of any leaf with > > > type instance-identifier or identityref and potentially CLI scripts. > > > > This would be a broken implementation. Since the prefix might change > > you cannot store them as is. You have to translate the prefix to > > namespace/module name, and store that. > > I agree. In XML land, there was a lot of software that relied on specific > prefixes, and it turned out to be a big problem. > > > > > That said, this encoding rule is really unfortunate. We fixed it in > > the JSON encoding, and I wish we had the same in XML... > > Prefixes still give you some flexibility, for example the ability to import > two > different revisions of the same module.
Sure, but that's not reflected in the encoding on-the-wire. /martin _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
