[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Goals for netconf - moving towards the charter description
David T. Perkins wrote:
It is anticipated that were will be
no requirement to have a "complete" XML parser on a managed device,
and depending on the data model definitions, it should be possible
to hand craft a lightweight XML parser.
I think that is a risky proposition. The real benefit of XML for
configuration data is that I can use the plethora of XML tools out there
to edit, store, and manage my configurations. The XML that these tools
spit out could be anything legal within the scope of the XML
recommendation. I dont want to get device configuration errors when I
place such a document into XMLConf, because the XML parser in the device
doesn't support this particular required feature of XML.
This was raised as an issue during the meeting by Graham Klyne, I
believe, and I agree with his point that if you say XML, you need to do
XML, and not a subset.
-Jonathan R.
--
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D. 600 Lanidex Plaza
Chief Scientist Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
dynamicsoft
jdrosen@dynamicsoft.com FAX: (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com
--
to unsubscribe send a message to xmlconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/xmlconf/>