In the XML examples in Appendix B, we see things like this:
<destination-prefix xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:\
ietf-ipv4-unicast-routing">0.0.0.0/0</destination-prefix>
Since the \-escaped newline is not legal in XML, the example would cause
failure if it were copy-and-pasted as is. So there should probably be an
editorial note clarifying that the \-escaped newlines are there for clarity
and should not be used in practice. Or I guess if you put in a perfectly
legal newline before the xmlns= and again before the ">", you might be able
to avoid the escaping?
As with many other YANG namespaces, constructs such as
<address-family xmlns:v4ur="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:\
ietf-ipv4-unicast-routing">v4ur:ipv4-unicast</address-family>
are not interoperable in general-purpose XML tools, and it seems a common
practice in YANG-related RFCs neither to avoid this problem nor to
acknowledge its existence, so while I will continue to mention it when I
see it, I don't expect anyone to address it.
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 2:23 PM David Dong via RT <
[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear Tim and Martin (cc: rtgwg WG),
>
> As the designated experts for the ns registry, can you review the proposed
> registration in draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rib-extend for us? Please see
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-rib-extend/
>
> The due date is May 10, 2023.
>
> If this is OK, when the IESG approves the document for publication, we'll
> make the registration at
>
> https://www.iana.org/assignments/xml-registry/
>
> With thanks,
>
> David Dong
> IANA Services Specialist
>
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
