> On 25 Feb 2016, at 14:43, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:42:03PM +0000, tom p. wrote: >> In the interests of clarity >> >> - datastores are not mentioned. These loom large in YANG and NETCONF >> and, I think, have been misunderstood by those wishing to extend YANG in >> various, new directions. Therefore I think that the I-D should say >> something, even if it is that the concept of datastore is alien to the >> envisaged uses of JSON (I could envisage a use where datastores do >> apply, but it is probably an unrealistic use:-) >> > > I do not see why an encoding document should talk about datastores. > Is there anything unclear how YANG defined data is encoded in JSON? If > not, then this document does its job. > >> -YANG 1.0 ditto. I realise that this I-D normatively references YANG >> 1.1 but there is a lot of YANG 1.0 about. My sense is that this I-D >> cannot work with YANG 1.0, in which case, I think that that needs >> stating. > > The JSON encoding works just fine with YANG 1.0. Perhaps this can be > stated explicitly with an informative reference to RFC 6020 if that > helps to avoid confusion. OK, this makes sense. Lada > > /js > > -- > Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH > Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany > Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <http://www.jacobs-university.de/> -- Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C