Apply errata

[kwatsen]

Issues closed

Closes #6
Closes netmod-wg/yang-next#134

Design

No design. I simply walked over the errata listed for RFC 7950 here. All errata marked Verified and Held for Document Update were applied. Each errata is applied in its own git commit with a link to the errata to simplify reviews.

Additional Information

There are two errata in the Reported state. Email sent to the list here.

[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?

[kwatsen]

Should we add each errata-submitter's name to the Acknowledgements section?

[reshad-equinix]

LGTM. Another pair of eyes would be good though.

[reshad-equinix]

Should we add each errata-submitter's name to the Acknowledgements section?

IMO yes.

[rgwilton]

Checked errata 7.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Applies verified and “Held for Document Update” RFC 7950 errata to the draft-yn-netmod-yang2.xml Internet-Draft source, aligning examples, YANG/XPath text, and ABNF grammar with the corrected specification text.

Changes:

• Updates multiple YANG and XML examples (imports/prefixes, decimal64 XPath comparison example, notification XML example namespace, bits example semicolon, etc.).
• Fixes and clarifies specification text in several sections (augment substatements, deviation “delete” wording, require-instance applicability, derived-from-or-self() description, when context rules).
• Extends leafref path ABNF to include deref()-based expressions.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[kwatsen]

Regarding this question:

Should we add each errata-submitter's name to the Acknowledgements section?

Reshad said yes, and Lou thinks that it's a good idea also. But I don't want to do it in this PR, because the other PR make-baseline restructures that section. So the plan is to merge this branch into main, then merge main into the make-baseline branch, where the Acknowledgements section will be updated.

[kwatsen]

Thank you Reshad and Rob for your comments. All conversations have been resolved.

I will merge this PR now.