On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 9:04 AM tom petch <[email protected]> wrote:

> From: Carsten Bormann <[email protected]>
> Sent: 11 February 2022 08:21
> >> (I’m also still not sure I’ve got an answer to my question about using
> inconsistent prefixes between YANG and the XML example.  What is being
> demonstrated here?)
> >>
> > <tp>
> > If you are referring to
> > " Is there a reason to violate the SHOULD?"
>
> I’m referring to the question I was trying to ask when I said this :-)
>
> > I did not see that as related to the thread but thought it was answered
> anyway by Juergen.  As he said, the SHOULD gets violated when prefix clash
> which, in the absence of a registry, a namespace, for prefix is possible.
>
> Yes, and thanks to him for answering my question as a general question.
>
> I was answering to a throwaway note that the authors got flak when their
> XML did not use the defined prefix.  My question was: why do that, then?
> Maybe that was not understood because “ianaift” actually *is* the prefix
> preferred in the YANG module, so my question doesn’t make sense.  (I’m not
> sure what the throwaway referred to.)
>
>
A prefix in an XML instance document and a prefix in a YANG document are
separate
and the rules for each are separate.  An implementation MUST handle any
prefix used
in either case.

<tp>
>
> Try again.
>
> I have commented a number of times on a YANG import which defines a prefix
> other than that in the RFC.  Last month, it was
>      import ietf-hardware {
>        prefix ietfhw;
> Usually, when I comment on this, the authors accept my comment and change
> the prefix - they did on this occasion - but sometimes I get pushback along
> the lines that YANG Guidelines is only a 'SHOULD' and we think that we have
> a good reason to ignore the 'SHOULD' .  To date, I have never agreed with
> the reason and go on commenting:-)  If that is flack, then yes, I have -
> and will - generate flack:-)
>

This is a readability issue and I agree with your efforts to enforce this
SHOULD.
It MAY be ignored only if usage of an assigned prefix would cause a conflict
(because 2 imported modules defined the same prefix-stmt value).


> Tom Petch
>
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>
>
>
Andy


> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>
_______________________________________________
netmod mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod

Reply via email to