Hi Rehat, On Wed, 2018-12-12 at 10:12 +0000, Rohit R Ranade wrote: > Hi, > > > 1.. The term “data model” is used many times in this document, but it is > not defined in this document but defined in RFC 7950. I think it should be > added under the “following terms are defined in [RFC7950]” part.
The definition of "data model" in RFC 7950 is too informal. What is meant by it in the schema mount document is basically "datastore schema" as defined in RFC 8342. Perhaps a better term would just be "schema". > > 2.. The term “This document allows mounting of complete data models > only” is used in Section 1. I think here “complete data model” should be > replaced by “schema tree” as it is more precise? No, "schema tree" is only for a single module, accrding to the definition in 7950. What is meant here is a schema of multiple modules, as defined by YANG library. > > a) RFC 7950 , schema tree: The definition hierarchy specified within a > module > b) RFC7950, data model: A data model describes how data is represented and > accessed > > 3.. The “data model” term is used many times Eg: “LNE's data model”, > “share the same data model”, “NI data model”, “mounting one data model > consisting of any number of YANG modules” etc, sometimes using the term > “data model” as a collection of YANG modules and sometimes for a single Yang > module. I feel, where-ever we refer to single Module, we need to use the term > “schema tree” and when we refer to collection of YANG modules, we can refer to > as Data Model.. Please provide your opinions. This was my original idea, but maybe it is better to use "schema" or "datastore schema" for the latter. Lada > > With Regards, > Rohit > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod -- Ladislav Lhotka Head, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: 0xB8F92B08A9F76C67 _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
