Hence why we go through so many hoops in the line-wrapping draft. Adrian
> -----Original Message----- > From: netmod [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Martin Bjorklund > Sent: 09 October 2018 11:07 > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [netmod] Whitespace in XML encoding - allowed ? > > Balázs Lengyel <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Recently we came up against a problem where a certain implementation > > did not accept the following: > > > > <with-defaults xmlns="..."> > > report-all > > </with-defaults> > > > > while it did accept > > > > <with-defaults xmlns="...">report-all</with-defaults> > > > > I am unsure whether YANG's XML encoding allows whitespace before and > > after a leaf's value? In RFC7950 it does not say yes or no. > > For example, RFC 7950 says about integers in 9.2.1: > > An integer value is lexically represented as an optional sign ("+" or > "-"), followed by a sequence of decimal digits. If no sign is > specified, "+" is assumed. > > So, space characters (and other characters) are not allowed. In XML, > whitespace has meaning, so: > > <foo>42</foo> > > is not the same as > > <foo> 42 </foo> > > Since the string " 42 " is not a legal integer lexical representation > according to 9.2.1, <foo> 42 </foo> is not a valid XML representation > for the integer foo. > > > I have > > found the following examples that seem to allow preceding/following > > whitespace: > > > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7950#section-4.2.9 > > > > <status xmlns="http://example.com/system";> > > The image example-fw-2.3 is being installed. > > </status> > > > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7950#section-7.16.3 > > > > <reporting-entity> > > /ex:interface[ex:name='Ethernet0'] > > </reporting-entity> > > > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6243#appendix-A.3.1 > > > > <with-defaults > > xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-netconf-with-defaults"> > > report-all > > </with-defaults> > > Yes, to be strict, these examples should have had some text that > explained that whitespace was added for readability. New documents > will hopefully use the new artwork draft's rules instead. > > > > /martin > > > > It is problematic that this is not clarified. IMHO this should be > > clarified in an errata to rfc7950. Chose one: > > > > 1 It is not allowed to add preceding or following whitespace after the > > value of a leaf/leaf-list. > > Note that some text documents may add whitespace to Netconf examples > > to avoid long lines, > > however this extra whitespace MUST NOT be present in the actual > > Netconf encoding. > > > > 2 It is not allowed to add preceding or following whitespace after the > > value of a leaf/leaf-list. > > 3 It is allowed to add preceding or following whitespace after the > > value of a leaf/leaf-list except > > for string based types, where the whitespace could be part of the > > leaf's value itself.. > > > > What do you think? > > > > regards Balazs > > > > -- > > Balazs Lengyel Ericsson Hungary Ltd. > > Senior Specialist > > Mobile: +36-70-330-7909 email: [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
