Hi Paul, I will respond to some of the comments here, and respond to the remaining in a separate thread.
> On Sep 10, 2024, at 7:04 AM, Joe Clarke (jclarke) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks for the comments and feedback, Paul. I’ve opened GitHub > issuehttps://github.com/netmod-wg/syslog-model/issues/14 > <https://github.com/netmod-wg/syslog-model/issues/14> so Mahesh and I can > track the necessary changes on our end. See below for some initial responses. > > The layout is completely broken / wrapped, making the document fairly > unreadable. Can this be fixed somehow ? > > > > [JMC] Éric had the same comment, and I thought we’d be good just expanding > the full tree. However, it seems this is causing readability and confusion > problems. In short, we do import from the TLS client server module. The > default 8340 tree representation just doesn’t make that apparent. We can > regenerate the tree to simply show that we use the groupings from that > module. This should address a few of your DISCUSS points. > Adding to Joe’s comment. The issue of tree diagrams being ugly is something we have run across several drafts recently. Regenerating the tree diagram showing just the groupings *may* help but will not be enough. At the same time, leaving the reader with a grouping name would leave them with a tree diagram that will give them only half the information on the model. The other half would have to be stitched together by the reader by reading the other documents that define the grouping. Currently, the tool that generates the tree diagram has no way to provide a reference to the document where the grouping is defined. I have opened a tooling feature request to “unfold” a folded artwork, e.g., tree diagram, source code etc, for formats such as HTML that can support horizontal scrolling. The other option is to provide an external reference to an HTML based tree diagram, if we can find a stable reference. > > > > facility-filter seems badly named as it also filters for severity ? Maybe > syslof-filter ? > > [JMC] I agree with you on this. In the GitHub issue I mentioned we could go > with syslog-filter or just filter (as syslog should be implied). > > [JMC] Mahesh and I will discuss and respond again with new text replies to > your other points. > Have changed facility-filter to syslog-filter. Thanks. > > > Joe > Mahesh Jethanandani [email protected]
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
