Hi, Barry Leiba via Datatracker <[email protected]> wrote: > Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for > draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext-04: No Objection > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-data-ext/ > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > A fine extension. Just three editorial nits: > > -- Section 1 — > > There is no > assumption that a YANG data structure can only be used as a top-level > abstraction, instead of nested within some other data structure. > > It’s a little odd to use “instead of” after “there is no assumption”; I can’t > explain it fully, but it feels odd to this native English speaker. I suggest > this: > > NEW > There is no > assumption that a YANG data structure can only be used as a top-level > abstraction, and it may also be nested within some other data structure. > END > > similar to the existing YANG "augment" statement. > > Make it “similarly”. > > — Section 1.1.1 — > > The following terms are defined in the Network Management Datastore > Architecture (NMDA) [RFC8342]. and are not redefined here: > > The period after the citation should be a comma.
Thanks for these suggestions, I have applied them all. /martin _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
