Re: [IETF] RE: RFC 2119 terms, ALL CAPS vs lower case

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On May 16, 2012, at 4:10 PM, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote:

>> From: John C Klensin [john-ietf@xxxxxxx]
>> 
>>> Remind me:
>>> Is bold must more or less compelling that underlined must. And
>>> where does uppercase MUST fit in?
>>> 
>>> I fear the slightly richer publication format will give rise
>>> to a slightly more complex revision of RFC 2119.
>> 
>> Let's try to remember that many of the comments/ requests for
>> alternate publication formats have been to make "display" more a
>> function of the devices being used.  Depending on type style
>> variations (style, size, font variations, underlining, etc.)
>> would pretty much defeat that particular claimed requirement.
>> As I take Sam's note to sort of point out, even the use of
>> uppercase to imply specific semantics can be problematic; we
>> should at least strive to not make things worse, IMO.
> 
> I'm looking forward to the normative use of <BLINK>...</BLINK>.

Errr… would that be more or less strong then the non-<BLINK> version of a word?

Initially I'd think more, but on reflection it only visible for half the time, so I guess it is half as strong?!  ;-)

W

> 
> Dale
> 




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]