W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > January to March 2011

rendering rfc 2119 keywords

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 11:57:51 -0500
To: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
Cc: Chimezie Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1297011471.5330.75.camel@waldron>
On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 15:18 +0000, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> Minor points - nothing for LC:
> 
> 
> >> [*] "*MUST* ....and the words appear as emphasized text, "
> >>
> >> The document does not use them in this way. They are not in bold later, and
> >> bold is reserved for HTTP Verbs.
> >> SmallCaps might be useful to emphasize.
> >
> > I switched to italics rather than bold.
> 
> What's the intention for the rest of the document?  These words are not 
> used italized.  I was expecting the RFC 2119 text to be in the same 
> style as used in the document as a whole: capitals would be the easiest way.
> 
> e.g.
> """
> A compliant implementation of this specification SHOULD accept HTTP 
> requests directed at its Graph Store
> """
> has SHOULD in plain upper case.
> 
> (not necessary for LC)

I kind of like the css trick OWL used.  In the HTML, it says....

        <em title="MUST in RFC 2119 context" class="RFC2119">MUST</em>
        
but the CSS says:

        .RFC2119 { font-style: italic; text-transform: lowercase; }
        
so when it's rendered without italics (as in RFCs) it's MUST but if you
have italics, it uses them instead.

Total hack, of course.  :-)     smallcaps is probably how I would do it.

        -- Sandro
        
Received on Sunday, 6 February 2011 16:58:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:45 GMT