[rfc-i] Is there a use case for 2119 keyword markup?
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Thu Jun 19 04:12:36 PDT 2014
On 2014-06-19 12:47, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) wrote:
> Of course RFC 2119 doesn't discuss mixing 2119 and non-2119 usage of these words in a document, and distinguishing between them with upper and lower case - it doesn't even make upper case mandatory. This is all post-2119 custom and practice. (Effectively mandated by the IESG.)
> I can see the point of markup. But <span class='rfc2119'>MUST</span> is a horrible thing to have to write instead of MUST. Someone suggested &must; My (non-XML expert) obvious suggestion is <must/> - which would appear in text as MUST. I guess MUST NOT would have to be <must-not/>.
Both can be made to work.
Best regards, Julian
More information about the rfc-interest