# Annotate multiple augmented statements
**URL:** https://dmap-community.ductus.global/t/annotate-multiple-augmented-statements/2662
**Category:** YANG
**Created:** [September 2, 2019, 2:10pm UTC](https://dmap-community.ductus.global/t/annotate-multiple-augmented-statements/2662 "2019-09-02T14:10:03Z")
**Posts on this page:** 5
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@jaka](https://dmap-community.ductus.global/u/jaka)
#### Post date: [September 2, 2019, 2:10pm UTC](https://dmap-community.ductus.global/t/annotate-multiple-augmented-statements/2662/1 "2019-09-02T14:10:03Z")
I’m trying to clean the source yang of any “tailf:” statements.
The problem I’m facing is that the source has multiple augmentations on the same “root node” only differing at “when conditions”.
the source example:
```
augment /if:interfaces/if:interface {
when "derived-from(./if:type, 'avift:l1-ethernet')";
.
.
.
.
}
augment /if:interfaces/if:interface {
when "derived-from(./if:type, 'avift:l2-ethernet')";
.
.
.
.
.
}
```
the annotation file example:
> ```
> tailf:annotate-statement "augment[target-node='/if:interfaces/if:interface']" {
> .
> .
> .
> }
> tailf:annotate-statement "augment[target-node='/if:interfaces/if:interface']" {
> .
> .
> .
> }
>
> ```
The confdc tells me that
error: No container statements with the given argument is found.
error: No leaf statements with the given argument is found.
error: No container statements with the given argument is found.
error: No container statements with the given argument is found.
These are all from the second annotation. If I comment out the first pair of source/annotation the yang builds successfully.
Putting both under the same annotate-statement does not help.
How do I solve this one please?
BR Jaka
---
### Author:  [@cohult](https://dmap-community.ductus.global/u/cohult)
#### Post date: [September 2, 2019, 6:07pm UTC](https://dmap-community.ductus.global/t/annotate-multiple-augmented-statements/2662/2 "2019-09-02T18:07:16Z")
Here’s an example:
```json
module my-interfaces-ann {
namespace "urn:dummy";
prefix dummy;
import ietf-interfaces {
prefix if;
}
import tailf-common {
prefix tailf;
}
tailf:annotate-module "my-interfaces" {
tailf:annotate-statement augment[name='/if:interfaces/if:interface'] {
tailf:annotate-statement leaf[name='my-leaf'] {
tailf:info "test";
}
}
}
}
```
---
### Author:  [@per](https://dmap-community.ductus.global/u/per)
#### Post date: [September 2, 2019, 7:10pm UTC](https://dmap-community.ductus.global/t/annotate-multiple-augmented-statements/2662/3 "2019-09-02T19:10:44Z")
@cohult, I believe @jaka already has that part covered (creative use of “target-node” instead of “name” btw:-) - the problem is that @jaka is trying to annotate two (or maybe even more…) _different_ `augment`-statements, that have the same `target-node` argument. I.e. there is no way to differentiate between them via an “equality predicate” using the `augment` argument, and each `tailf:annotate-statement` at a given level is interpreted independent from the others, thus they will all match the _first_ `augment`-statement.
@jaka, it seems from the confdc errors that you get that you are annotating schema nodes (`container`, `leaf`, etc), and then I would suggest that you use `tailf:annotate` instead of `tailf:annotate-statement` in this case, it is really the clearest/cleanest solution. However `tailf:annotate` can’t annotate statements that don’t define schema nodes, for that you need to use `tailf:annotate-statement`. The trick then is to be even more creative with the “XPath-like expression”, and guess that you can use a different predicate (even though it isn’t actually documented), in particular a “position predicate”. I.e. `tailf:annotate-statement augment[1]` identifies the first `augment` statement in the module being annotated, `tailf:annotate-statement augment[2]` the second one, and so on.
This is obviously pretty tedious to use, and error-prone with respect to changes in the annotated module (but hopefully the substatements will generate errors like the ones you got in case the `augment` statements are moved around or added/deleted) - which is why I recommend that you use `tailf:annotate` instead if at all possible.
---
### Author:  [@cohult](https://dmap-community.ductus.global/u/cohult)
#### Post date: [September 3, 2019, 8:04am UTC](https://dmap-community.ductus.global/t/annotate-multiple-augmented-statements/2662/4 "2019-09-03T08:04:58Z")
Thanks for catching my misunderstanding @per. Another attempt at examples of the two options described above.
Example YANG:
```xml
module my-interfaces {
namespace "http://tail-f.com/ns/example/my-interfaces";
prefix myif;
import ietf-interfaces {
prefix if;
}
leaf test { type int8; }
augment "/if:interfaces/if:interface" {
when "/myif:test = 0";
leaf my-leaf1 { type int8; }
}
augment "/if:interfaces/if:interface" {
when "/myif:test = 1";
leaf my-leaf2 { type int8; }
}
}
```
taif:annotate example:
```auto
module my-interfaces-ann {
namespace "urn:dummy";
prefix dummy;
import ietf-interfaces {
prefix if;
}
import my-interfaces {
prefix myif;
}
import tailf-common {
prefix tailf;
}
tailf:annotate "/if:interfaces/if:interface/myif:my-leaf1" {
tailf:info "test";
}
tailf:annotate "/if:interfaces/if:interface/myif:my-leaf2" {
tailf:info "test2";
}
}
```
“position predicate” example:
```auto
module my-interfaces-ann {
namespace "urn:dummy";
prefix dummy;
import ietf-interfaces {
prefix if;
}
import tailf-common {
prefix tailf;
}
tailf:annotate-module "my-interfaces" {
tailf:annotate-statement augment[1] {
tailf:annotate-statement leaf[name='my-leaf1'] {
tailf:info "test";
}
}
}
tailf:annotate-module "my-interfaces" {
tailf:annotate-statement augment[2] {
tailf:annotate-statement leaf[name='my-leaf2'] {
tailf:info "test2";
}
}
}
}
```
---
### Author:  [@per](https://dmap-community.ductus.global/u/per)
#### Post date: [September 3, 2019, 10:14am UTC](https://dmap-community.ductus.global/t/annotate-multiple-augmented-statements/2662/5 "2019-09-03T10:14:12Z")
Thanks for writing the examples that I was too lazy to do:-) @cohult. I’ll make amends by showing more “compact” ways to write the annotations - whether they’re _better_ I can’t say, a matter of taste perhaps.
taif:annotate example:
```auto
tailf:annotate /if:interfaces/if:interface {
tailf:annotate myif:my-leaf1 {
tailf:info "test";
}
tailf:annotate myif:my-leaf2 {
tailf:info "test2";
}
}
```
“position predicate” example:
```auto
tailf:annotate-module my-interfaces {
tailf:annotate-statement augment[1] {
tailf:annotate-statement leaf[name='my-leaf1'] {
tailf:info "test";
}
}
tailf:annotate-statement augment[2] {
tailf:annotate-statement leaf[name='my-leaf2'] {
tailf:info "test2";
}
}
}
```