[rfc-i] Is there a use case for 2119 keyword markup?
nico at cryptonector.com
Sat Jun 21 19:50:13 PDT 2014
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 4:31 PM, John Levine <johnl at taugh.com> wrote:
>>I tend to to think that having dedicated markup will make people
>>more careful than they are now when all they need is the shift key,
>>but that's psychological speculation.
> I'm having trouble getting a lot of psychological distance among
> MUST and &must; and <must/>.
There is none.
The only value is in having markup that an XSLT processor could use to
render slightly differently than any other capitalized word.
Arguably an XSLT processor can do this anyways because it's always
possible to match on the RFC2119 terms anyways. That... means that
there was probably no point to this thread, which means that unless
I'm wrong about the ability to easily transform RFC2119 words in
source text nodes, then we can indeed drop this (not for process
reasons but because we're talking about a no-op).
More information about the rfc-interest