[rfc-i] Is there a use case for 2119 keyword markup?

Dave Crocker dhc at dcrocker.net
Fri Jun 20 06:46:31 PDT 2014


On 6/19/2014 10:21 PM, Tim Bray wrote:
> The idea of marking up the normative text around the 2119 words is
> seductive but I think a mistake.  There’s endless room for argument as
> to exactly how far to mark up, but RFCs seem to work OK when we leave
> that up to the judgment of the reader.


This highlights the larger and continuing point that we should be
resisting the temptation to solve problems (and opportunities) that are
not already perceived by the long-standing community of RFC writers and
readers.  Larry's follow-on note is an example.  Quite a nice idea, but
is that sufficient?

Those familiar with Dave Farber's linguistic predilictions, called
Farberisms, might recall a particularly useful one, when he referred to
a technology that fills a much-needed gap.


d/
-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list