[rfc-i] draft-rfc-image-files-03

Phillip Hallam-Baker hallam at gmail.com
Mon Apr 9 11:58:52 PDT 2012


Umm, I think that typing uppercase has become so second nature now
that I MUST continue doing it whatever the proposal suggests that I
SHOULD do. MAY I disagree?

I like tagging though, that opens up the possibility of an
automatically generated table of normative requirements.

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Paul E. Jones <paulej at packetizer.com> wrote:
>> > Not specific to this HTML example, but one thing we night want to
>> > consider is whether we want to change the normative words from all
>> > uppercase to italics (or bold) lowercase.  This document shows
>> > uppercase, because that is the current agreed style driven by the use
>> > of ASCII.  HTML opens up an opportunity to change that, if we want.
>>
>> That's the wrong question.
>>
>> The right question is: do we want to explicitly tag RFC 2119-relevant
>> words so that they can be rendered appropriately using whatever output
>> format/device that is used?
>
> Tagging is an option we have if we go with HTML.  I could not propose
> tagging if we were to adopt some other document formats.  Tagging is one
> thing.  The use of uppercase or lowercase is another.  I understand if we
> tag certain words, we can render them in a particular way.  We can also type
> them a certain way, tagged or not.  I'd prefer to not force use of
> uppercase, but tagging to allow the option when producing the output is
> reasonable.
>
> So, I agree use of tags around normative words would be useful.  I still
> want those entered by the human in lowercase in the source document.
>
> Paul
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest



-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list