Re: [rtcweb] Uppercase question for RFC2119 words

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

On 3/30/2016 7:09 AM, Adam Roach wrote:
>> - There are similar-looking English words that are not capitalized,
>> and they have their normal English meanings; this document has nothing
>> to do with them.
>
> Yes. This. This, this, this, a million times, this. If we published a
> document that said only this, it would be a huge net win for the community.


Assuming that merely documenting this explicitly is sufficient, perhaps.

That such a rule differs from natural English -- which does not 
typically alter semantics based on case -- and that most readers of RFCs 
will not have such detailed knowledge of RFC2119 nor read RFCs with the 
care such a rule demands, my question BARRY and adam and EveryOne Else, 
is what makes anyone think that such a rule must (MUST?) ensure proper 
reading of RFCs so as to distinguish between normative portions and 
advisory portions?

It's worth distinguishing between rules that make the writers more 
comfortable, from rules that aid the reading efficacy in practical terms.

d/

-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net