Joseph M. Reagle Jr. wrote: [snip] > > 7.0 last par. > > Normalized Form C -> Normalization Form C > > I believe it is Normalized Form C. > http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr15/tr15-18.html If you search that page for "Normalization Form C" you'll get about 19 hits (and zero for "Normalized Form C"). > > In References, all the RFCs could be listed the same way. I don't > > know the preferred way yet, and used commas and the space between > > RFC and 2119 in this example: RFC 2119, Key words for use in RFCs to > > Indicate Requirement Levels, S. Bradner, March 1997. > > Could you provide a citation that this is the proper way? Regardless, Don > did the RFCs and I think they are consistent amongst themselves, though > not with other references. As I mentioned I don't know the preferred way yet. It would be nice if the spacing (RFC 2119 <-> RFC2119) and punctuation matched but this is not a big deal. Thank you for the very prompt response. -- World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Susan Lesch, Technical Editor tel:+1.858.483.4819 mailto:lesch@w3.org http://www.w3.org/People/Lesch/Received on Wednesday, 18 October 2000 21:02:05 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:11 GMT