Re: Do we need data modeling rules like an SMI

[Andy Bierman <ietf@andybierman.com>]

Balazs Lengyel wrote:
> McDonald, Ira wrote:
>  > And a data model and single namespace should be able to
> > span a tree of XSD files, not just a single file.
>
> Could you explain this a bit more.

I was going to comment on this, but Joel did first.
You cannot assume a 1:1 mapping between modules and
namespaces.  Just like the SMI, the module is just
a container of definitions that has absolutely no
hard-wired relationship to the nature or location of
the conceptual data model instances described in each module.


> Yes in design and during model specification it is really important to 
> be able to use multiple files. But is it needed when the device presents 
> it's data model on the wire ?

No.
It is not needed at all, but NMS developers want it anyway.
The XML on the wire is identified with namespaces.

The solution is to simply add an optional 'schemaLocation'
attribute to the <capability> element, so module capabilities
(which identify a conformance level to a particular module)
can also indicate the URL for the actual module schema.



> Balazs

Andy

--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>