A YANG-Next issue has been created to track a fix for this issue: https://github.com/netmod-wg/yang-next/issues/103 <https://github.com/netmod-wg/yang-next/issues/103>
Kent > On Feb 14, 2020, at 6:48 AM, tom petch <[email protected]> wrote: > > _____________________________________ > From: netmod <[email protected]> on behalf of Rob Wilton (rwilton) > <[email protected]> > Sent: 14 February 2020 10:14 > To: Kent Watsen; [email protected] > My interpretation matches the one that Martin gives in > https://github.com/mbj4668/pyang/issues/559 > > <tp> > > I was looking at > draft-boydseda- ipfix-psamp-bulk-data-yang-model > and see nine choice statements of which six have no case, two have a single > case and one has multiple case. The single case have a note to the effect > that they may be augmented, the others have no note. The no case do have > multiple container or leaf statements. It does make me curious. > > Tom Petch > > > I.e. the short hand notation … > > choice test { > container foo { > if-feature disabled-feature; > ... > } > } > > is equivalent to: > > choice test { > case foo { > container foo { > if-feature disabled-feature; > ... > } > } > } > > Filing an issue in YANG.Next to clarify, or further discuss, this seems > helpful to me. > > Thanks, > Rob > > > From: netmod <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Kent Watsen > Sent: 13 February 2020 14:49 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [netmod] Implicit case statementa > > > RFC 7950 says: > > As a shorthand, the "case" statement can be omitted if the branch > > contains a single "anydata", "anyxml", "choice", "container", "leaf", > > "list", or "leaf-list" statement. In this case, the case node still > > exists in the schema tree, and its identifier is the same as the > > identifier of the child node. > > This seems clear, albeit incomplete, as inconsistencies [1] exist amongst > `pyang`and `yanglint` (I did not test with `yangson`) in how the “if-feature” > statement is handled, though I imagine other statements (e.g., “when”) may > also fall into this discussion as well. > > Ultimately, the question is what Errata and/or YANG-next issue should be > filed. I’m okay either way, so long as it’s clear and can be implemented > consistently across tooling. > > In the meanwhile, I recommend module designers avoid using the shorthand > notation, as there are no known issues with the “longhand” notation. > > [1] https://github.com/mbj4668/pyang/issues/559 > > Kent // contributor >
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
