make-baseline

[kwatsen]

Issues closed

Closes netmod-wg/yang-next#10
Closes netmod-wg/yang-next#11
Closes netmod-wg/yang-next#12

Design

Please see designs/make-baseline.md

Additional Information

This is a pretty mechanical update. No change to YANG 1.1 is made.

[github-actions]

All of the following MUST be verified by AUTHORS before merging to main:

• Updated "Changes Since RFC 7950" section, or N/A?
• Updated "IANA Considerations" section, or N/A?
• Updated "Security Considerations" section, or N/A?
• Updated "Normative/Informational References" sections, or N/A?
• Updated "Acknowledgements" section, or N/A? (Not GitHub users)

The following MUST be verified by the EDITOR before merging to main:

• The XML artifact uploads to Datatracker?

[reshad-equinix]

Review by Claude AI (on behalf of @reshad-equinix)

Note: The following review was generated by Claude AI at the request of @reshad-equinix.
Context used: XML encoding rules were moved to draft-ietf-netmod-yang-xml; NETCONF-specific content was intentionally deleted (NETCONF WG will pick it up for NETCONF-next).

---

1. yang-xml references use the old individual-submission name (lines 73, 2889, 2893)

All three <xref> instances use I-D.yn-netmod-yang-xml, but the document has since been adopted by the WG as draft-ietf-netmod-yang-xml. These should be updated to I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-xml.

Occurrences:

• Line 73: XML <xref target="I-D.yn-netmod-yang-xml"/>
• Line 2889: ...in the XML encoding <xref target="I-D.yn-netmod-yang-xml"/>
• Line 2893: See <xref section="4" target="I-D.yn-netmod-yang-xml"/> for details.

---

2. Three NETCONF XML examples still present in the Language Overview (lines 1237–1253, 1307–1327, 1387–1399)

The RPC, action, and notification examples still show full NETCONF framing (<rpc>, <rpc-reply>, urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0, urn:ietf:params:netconf:capability:notification:1.0) and are labeled "NETCONF XML Example". Per the design intent, NETCONF-specific content was removed — these appear to have been missed. They should either be deleted entirely or replaced with generic XML encoding examples consistent with draft-ietf-netmod-yang-xml (which covers RPC/action/notification parameter encoding without the NETCONF envelope).

---

3. rpc-error MUST in Basic Conformance (line 1435)

an "rpc-error" containing the "error-tag", "error-message", and "error-app-tag"
values defined in this document MUST be supported.

rpc-error is NETCONF-specific (RFC 6241) and this appears to be another piece of NETCONF-specific normative text that wasn't removed. Should be deleted or reworded in a protocol-neutral way.

---

4. No pointer to yang-xml in the Language Overview XML examples

The Language Overview (Section 3.2) contains many "XML Encoding Example" blocks but never tells the reader where the XML encoding rules are defined. There should be a sentence somewhere in that section pointing to draft-ietf-netmod-yang-xml — the companion document where those rules now live.

---

5. Typo: "free-loade" in JSON encoding example (line 748)

"class": "free-loade"

Should be "free-loader" — the XML encoding example immediately above it (line 729) has the correct spelling: <class>free-loader</class>.

---

6. Mismatched prefix in augment example (lines 1188–1203)

The prose says "if the above augmentation were in a module with prefix 'other'", and the XML encoding correctly uses other:uid. But the JSON encoding example uses my-example:uid instead. One of these is wrong — they need to match.

---

7. Placeholder text in "YANG 2.0 Conformance" section (line 1443)

<t>Nothing yet...</t>

This section needs real content before the PR is merged.

---

8. FIXME comment left in the abstract (lines 38–39)

the original specification. <!-- FIXME: use more exact text later?  e.g.
  "small number of backwards incompatibilities with YANG version 1.1" -->

This XML comment is inside <abstract> and will appear in rendered output. Needs to be resolved.

---

9. IANA assignment rules cross-reference RFC 6020 Section 14 (lines 2646, 3208)

Both the "module" and "submodule" statement sections say:

MUST be assigned by IANA; see Section 14 in <xref target="RFC6020"/>.

As a new document, YANG 2.0 should have its own IANA Considerations section (as RFC 7950 did in Section 16) rather than deferring to the YANG 1.0 RFC.

---

10. Stray ) after URL in Discussion Venues (line 50)

...developed on GitHub at <eref target="https://github.com/netmod-wg/yang2"/>).

There is a closing ) with no matching opening (.

---

11. Double period etc.. (line 52)

...e.g., PRs, RFC-diffs, etc.. — should be etc. (single period).

---

12. Typo in table name: includes's (line 3058)

<name>The includes's Substatements</name>

Should be The include's Substatements — matching the pattern used elsewhere (e.g., "The import's Substatements").

---

Overall this is a solid baseline. The most substantive items are #1 (yang-xml reference name), #2 (NETCONF XML examples that weren't deleted), and #7 (empty conformance section).