- From: David Wainberg <david@networkadvertising.org>
- Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 09:16:20 -0400
- To: "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>
- CC: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
On 10/20/12 2:04 AM, Michael[tm] Smith wrote: > "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, 2012-10-19 14:18 -0700: > >> On Oct 19, 2012, at 1:40 PM, David Wainberg wrote: >>> On 10/18/12 6:47 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: >>>> Editors, please note that the all-caps is only for highlighting >>>> the words so that requirements are easily found -- all usage >>>> of those words, whether in caps or not, is subject to RFC2119. >>> Roy -- I'm confused on this point. The W3C process doc says the following: >>> >>> " The terms MUST, MUST NOT, SHOULD, SHOULD NOT, REQUIRED, and MAY when >>> highlighted (through style sheets, and in uppercase in the source) are >>> used in accordance with RFC 2119 [RFC2119]." >>> >>> It specifies "when highlighted," so I expected that to be the convention for all W3C docs. >> Thanks David, I was not aware of that statement in the W3C process. > To be clear, it's not in the Process document as a general statement about > requirements or conventions for other W3C documents. It's simply a statement > in the "Status of this Document" of the Process document itself, And the > scope of it is restricted to just the Process document itself. It's clearly > not intended to express or imply any convention for other W3C documents. Yes, I could have been more clear about that. But, having read it in the process doc, I assumed it to be the convention for all W3 docs, expecting that the organization would expect consistency on something like that.
Received on Saturday, 20 October 2012 13:16:54 UTC