Hi Tom,
Hi Tom,
On 17/01/2018 09:52, t.petch wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alexander Clemm" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 2:20 AM
+1 to (2) as preference, followed by (1). I don't think (3) is needed
here. The purpose is to make this human-readable and provide readers a
good sense of the overall structure.
<tp>
That's what I thought until Benoit said, and Robert agreed, that
'In the end, the tree view should be browsed with tooling.'
The text based YANG tree diagram (i.e. covered by this draft) doesn't
need to be browsable by tooling. The purpose of these diagrams should
be to go in text documents to help explain and illustrate (to human
readers) the structure of a YANG model.
By "In the end, the tree view should be browsed with tooling.", what I
mean is that I think that tools like YANG catalog will be the long
term way of interacting with and browsing YANG modules. For example,
the link below for the RIP module.
https://www.yangcatalog.org/yang-search/yang_tree.php?module=ietf-rip
This provides an interactive GUI "tree view" of a YANG model, which
should be structurally equivalent as the text tree diagram, but
otherwise the information may be represented in a more visual way.
This will become even more powerful when all of the standard YANG
modules are available together in a single browsable tree.
Exactly what I meant.
'In the end, the tree view should be browsed with tooling.' doesn't mean
that the tree diagram, to be inserted in the RFC text,(according to
draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams-04
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-tree-diagrams/>should
be browsed with tooling.
Sorry if it was not clear.
Regards, Benoit
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
