Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> wrote: > On 01/16/2018 11:56 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > > > Vladimir Vassilev <vladi...@transpacket.com> wrote:
[...] > >> There is also undocumented alignment space count function before > >> <type> that pyang uses to align the <type> fields of child data leafs > >> with common ancestor. If this is specified in the draft the tree > >> output can be deterministic and for me this is an advantage. This is > >> currently one of the few underspecified pieces of the tree format so I > >> had to check pyang implementation in oder to generate same alignment > >> space counts and binary identical tree output results. > > I think that we at least should write that there may be more than one > > space between <opts> and <type>: > > > > There may be any number of additional space characters between > > <opts> and <type>. > For the sake of the argument (at least having this on the mailing list > as reference): > > <type> should be aligned at a common offset for all sibling nodes > from the start of <name> by adding trailing spaces. The recommended > offset is 3 plus the length of the longest node name among all > sibling nodes > including those siblings defined under choice and case nodes. > > This is what pyang does now. It is not a perfect solution but it > allows identical output down to the bit. Does anyone else have an opinion on this? I can see three alternatives: 1) allow any number of addtional spaces 2) allow any number of addtional spaces + define a suggested alignment algorithm 3) mandate the alignment algorithm /martin _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod