On 3/25/19 09:29, Joe Clarke wrote: > First, I agree with Jürgen that the "target" terminology confused me, > especially so given you have target-module and inline-target-spec. Like > Jürgen and Rob said, "schema" seems to work better. And maybe > "inline-schema-module-spec" would be clearer that the spec modifies the > modules from which the schema is generated. > > To the point about yang-data-ext/structure, I see instance data was very > useful, but it's a must to be able to augment its metadata. YANG > Catalog would use that. If this draft moves forward without > sx:structure, then I think it would need to be straight YANG so that > augments will work (i.e., a schema element would exist to augment). > > A few other comments (minor): > > Section 2.1: > > "P2 Re-use existing formats similar to the <get> operation/request" > > Isn't the format similar to a <get> _response_ versus the request? > > === > > Section 3 > > s/and and/and/
One other nit I just noticed. While I appreciate being acknowledged, my last name has an 'e' at the end: Joe Clarke. :-) Joe _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
