Re: [w3c/browser-payment-api] Cannot use 2119 terms in notes (#240)

The "should" in that note is not a 2119 term (in that it is not annotated as a 2119 term).  It is just the common English usage of the word.  2119 terms in this and other respec documents are always in uppercase and always annotated with class "2119".  

As an aside, this way of indicating that it is a 2119 term may be insufficient from an accessibility perspective.  I wonder if there shouldn't be a more explicit accessible name so that screen readers have better guidance.  @joanmarie or @marcoscaceres do you have an opinion?

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/browser-payment-api/issues/240#issuecomment-242034161