W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-comments@w3.org > June 2013

RE: [RDF_CONCEPTS] Editorial - Font problem on RFC2119 terms

From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 16:07:59 +0200
To: "'public-rdf-comments'" <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <010901ce6776$404dde90$c0e99bb0$@lanthaler@gmx.net>
On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 3:53 PM, David Booth wrote:
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html
> 
> RFC2119 conformance terms are indistinguishable from the rest of the
> text when portions of the spec are copied and pasted in plain text.
> They are only rendered in a small-caps font when viewed as HTML.
> 
> Here is an example of a sentence copied and pasted from
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-
> concepts/index.html#section-skolemization
> 
>      "Systems wishing to do this should mint a new, globally
>      unique IRI (a Skolem IRI) for each blank node so replaced."
> 
> It should appear as:
> 
>      "Systems wishing to do this SHOULD mint a new, globally
>      unique IRI (a Skolem IRI) for each blank node so replaced."
> 
> to indicate that "SHOULD" is an RFC2119 conformance term.
> 
> This is a problem that I observed before in the SPARQL specs, so I'm
> wondering if the root of the problem is that it never got fixed in the
> spec-generating software.  (Is it called "re-spec" or something like
> that?)
> 
> Could someone please fix this in the software, or point me to the
> source
> code so that I can help fix it?  It is important that these conformance
> terms be recognizable when the spec is quoted in email discussions,
> over
> instant messenger, and other contexts where the fonts are not
> preserved.

I've fixed that a couple of months ago. Apparently RDF Concepts uses an
outdated version



--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler
Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2013 14:08:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:29:57 UTC