W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-qa@w3.org > June 2003

Re: how should RFC 2119 text be rendered?

From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 07:10:58 -0400
Message-Id: <a05210620bb1c9031d48a@[10.0.1.2]>
To: www-qa@w3.org, lesch@w3.org

At 14:57 -0600 2003-06-12, Alex Rousskov wrote:
>  > "When these key words are used in the RFC sense, make them UPPERCASE,
>  > enclose them in the em element, and style them with CSS to make the
>  > UPPERCASE readable.
>  > <em title="MUST in RFC 2119 context"
>  >         class="RFC2119">MUST</em>
>  >
>>  .RFC2119 {
>>     text-transform: lowercase;
>>     font-style: italic;
>  > }  "
>  >
>  > and the recommended styling removes the uppercase from the view of
>  > the document as seen in most browsers, so it is impossible for a
>  > reader to see whether the word is being used normatively or normally
>  > (with emphasis).

the style is also italic :) so there will be still a difference and 
if you add a colour. I guess you might be fine.

>  > So, which is it? MAY what the reader sees on their screen look like
>  > lowercase italic, or MUST it look like uppercase Roman?
>
>Hmm... The "lowercase" text-transform looks like a typo unless the
>authors consider true uppercase not "readable". Personally, I much
>prefer "MUST" to "must" because many documents use lower case words as
>just words, not RFC2119 keywords.

It's not a typo it's more an english readability issue. Some people 
prefer to have it lowercase.
-- 
Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager
           http://www.w3.org/QA/

      --- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---
Received on Monday, 23 June 2003 07:15:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 12:14:00 GMT