Support for metadata handling?

[HRogge]

Hi, it is a little bit difficult to find out what RFCs and features freeconf does support or not.

Does it support metadata (rfc7952) and/or XML (RFC 8040) encoding?

[dhubler]

Really just RFC7950 and RFC8040 (sans XML). Freeconf project brings the basics of the YANG and RESTCONF standards to any codebase easily and hopes to advance its standard support as the right opportunity comes along.

…

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 2:30 AM Henning Rogge ***@***.***> wrote: Hi, it is a little bit difficult to find out what RFCs and features freeconf does support or not. Does it support metadata (rfc7952) and/or XML (RFC 8040) encoding? — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#21>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAACA7TNWLWDRXKIBBHUUUTSHLRRVANCNFSM4RX4WVZA> .

[HRogge]

Now that I am actively using Freeconf I will look into the support of RFC 7952, most likely with an extension of the nodeutil/reflect code. Something that allows to attach metadata to existing datastructures without changing them.

[dhubler]

That would be awesome! and I wasn't even familiar with that RFC. I wonder yang files using this RFC even get thru the parser.

…

On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 3:05 AM Henning Rogge ***@***.***> wrote: Now that I am actively using Freeconf I will look into the support of RFC 7952, most likely with an extension of the nodeutil/reflect code. Something that allows to attach metadata to existing datastructures without changing them. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#21 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAACA7UKVBB4URXIGNT5LLLV3BUCNANCNFSM4RX4WVZA> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[HRogge]

Funny to get back to this issue...

I tested a set of YANG files that use the "annotation extension", but the parser throws a syntax error when seeing the extension in action. I think the parser CAN process the extension definition (as in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7952#section-7 ), but then it stumbles when the extension is used in another yang file.

[dhubler]

Can you provide an example where the stumble happens. Since your first email, I have added support ietf-restconf : extension yang-data which appears to look similar to this. meta.Extension can now handle full nested yang definitions when if finds "yang-data" extensions, this appears to only require a single leaf so thinking this might be a lot more approachable now.

…

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 4:56 AM Henning Rogge ***@***.***> wrote: Funny to get back to this issue... I tested a set of YANG files that use the "annotation extension", but the parser throws a syntax error when seeing the extension in action. I think the parser CAN process the extension definition (as in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7952#section-7 ), but then it stumbles when the extension is used in another yang file. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#21 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAACA7UOLWLARVK5LGZDJODYU4I45AVCNFSM4RX4WVZKU5DIOJSWCZC7NNSXTN2JONZXKZKDN5WW2ZLOOQ5TCOJVHEYDQNJYHA3A> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>