OK. I advise you to have a translator between your internal representation
and our one - they shouldn't be tightly coupled together.
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 10:13 AM Shivaram Mysore <shivaram.mysore(a)gmail.com>
FYI - we are developing a JSON-LD schema and trying to represent schema
IDs via URIs. Hence the question.
On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 2:19 PM Josh Bailey <joshb(a)google.com> wrote:
> The keys aren't overloaded because they're at different levels - the
> configuration infrastructure is not flat. Is there a requirement that that
> it should be flat? We would like to understand that more if so.
> Also, from a user point of view, I can imagine that "router_vlans" under
> "routers" is redundant.
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 8:55 AM Shivaram Mysore <
> shivaram.mysore(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Is there a reason to have a overloaded key within faucet.yaml ? For
>> example, there is at least one faucet.yaml overloaded key - vlans. It
>> is a top-level index of a network’s vlan objects; and, within a routers
>> item it is an array of vlan names.
>> While this may be ok, parsing faucet.yaml can be little tricky. Is
>> there any reason that we could not make this say, router_vlans or
>> something like that?
>> Also, I think this
should be "
>> Faucet-dev mailing list