I assume 'An annotation carries a single value.' should be clear enough. A reference to section 7.6 is actually misleading since that section deals with many more things that are not applicable to leafs. But I think we are already done with this. /js On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 04:39:54PM +0000, tom p. wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" <j.schoenwaelder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Friday, March 11, 2016 1:07 PM > > > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 11:15:28AM +0000, tom p. wrote: > > > Lada, Robert > > > > > > The other angle from which this might be approached is that the I-D > > > already says > > > > > > " Using the "type" statement, a type is specified for the > annotation > > > value according to the same rules as for YANG "leaf" type. " > > > > > > while rfc6020bis says > > > > > > " The "leaf" statement is used to define a scalar variable of a > > > particular built-in or derived type." > > > > > > so if you know your YANG off by heart, then you will know that > > > annotations must be scalar. I agree that the text needs to be > clearer. > > > Perhaps, > > > OLD > > > " o annotations are scalar values and cannot be further > structured;" > > > NEW > > > "Annotations obey the same rules as for a YANG "leaf" type > [rfc6020bis > > > s.7.6] and so are limited to scalar variables." > > > > There is no 'leaf type' in YANG. YANG has leaf nodes in the schema > > tree. An annotation is not a node in the schema tree. Perhaps > > something like this: > > Juergen > > Well, I know, but I was quoting directly from yang-metadata-04 s.3, > namely > > "Using the "type" statement, a type is specified for the annotation > value according to the same rules as for YANG "leaf" type. " > > which is why I gave a reference to s7.6 of RFC6020bis rather than s.7.4. > > Perhaps change s.3 in addition to your change > > OLD > Using the "type" statement, a type is specified for the annotation > value according to the same rules as for YANG "leaf" type. > NEW > Using the "type" statement, a type is specified for the annotation > value according to the same rules as for the type of a YANG > "leaf"[RFC6020bis s.7.6]. > > I do think that that mention of leaf is helpful - as you say, the WG > agreed to this restriction as opposed to allowing more complex > annotations and referencing "leaf" for me makes that clearer. > > Tom Petch > > > An annotation carries a single value. The type substatement, which > > must be present, takes as an argument the name of an existing > > built-in or derived type and the value of the annotation must match > > this type. See Section 7.4 of [RFC6020bis] for details. > > > > /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/>