Re: RFC2119 Styling

> On Jun 1, 2023, at 04:50, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> My plan for Bikeshed is to introduce a very minimal shorthand for
> explicitly stating that you mean the 2119 keyword, and then lint for
> any usages that aren't marked up as such, suggesting you either mark
> them up or reword. I just filed
> <https://github.com/speced/bikeshed/issues/2564> to track it, my plan
> is probably to make the text `2119may` expand into a marked-up "may",
> and similar for the others.

Similarly, we’ve been chewing on this for a while on the Respec side… our thinking was to just allow editors to set what they would like to use as a class on the the conformance section… something like:

<section id=“conformance” class=“RFC2119”>
</section>

Right now, Respec defaults to BCP14. IIRC, Respec already warns about incorrect RFC2119 in non-normative blocks (notes, examples, etc.), but could make it more strict.