On 01/04/2022 15:49, Andy Bierman wrote:
On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 4:24 AM Kent Watsen <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Jernej,
> RFC7950, 7.14.4. says:
>
> Input parameters are encoded as child XML elements to the rpc
node's
> XML element, in the same order as they are defined within the
"input"
> statement.
>
> For the following model:
>
> module b {
> namespace "b:uri";
> prefix b;
>
> grouping params {
> container params {
> leaf x {
> type string;
> }
> }
> }
>
> rpc foo {
> input {
> uses params {
> augment params {
> leaf y {
> type string;
> }
> }
> }
> }
> }
> }
>
> If both "leaf" data nodes are instantiated (XML encoding) as
part of <rpc> for "foo", does <x> come before or after <y> (in
document order)?
Augmented-in nodes come after other nodes.
Maybe this is an implementation convention, but the RFC says they are
encoded in any order.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7950#section-7.17.2
You are referring to this:
When a node is augmented, the augmenting child nodes are encoded as
subelements to the augmented node, in any order.
This implies interleaving of augmenting and non-augmenting child nodes
within "input" parameters for XML encoding?
Jernej
I’ve always wished there were a way to specify where they’re
placed, for readability, but it’s too inconsequential to raise as
an issue here.
There is no canonical order defined for any schema nodes.
There is no order at all defined for top-level or augmenting schema nodes.
> Jernej
Kent
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
