[rfc-i] draft-iab-xml2rfc-03, "2.32 <name>"

[paul.hoffman at vpnc.org (Paul Hoffman)]

On 22 Jun 2016, at 1:18, Julian Reschke wrote:

> On 2016-06-22 01:40, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> On 13 Jun 2016, at 0:37, Julian Reschke wrote:
>>
>>> <https://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/draft-iab-xml2rfc-03.html#rfc.section.2.32>:
>>>
>>>
>>> "The name of the section, note, figure, or texttable. This name can
>>> have flow markup such as to make some characters use a fixed-width
>>> font, or to include references."
>>>
>>> So it allows comments (<cref>), but not, for instance, <em>.
>>>
>>> Are we sure that this is the right set of elements to allow?
>>
>> As sure as we can be. We know that names will appear in section
>> headings, and those might be rendered as italics or bold, so allowing
>> things like <em> will cause surprise. Thus, allowing reference 
>> elements
>> plus <tt> seems like the maximal non-surprising set.
>
> Noted, but not convinced.
>
> 1) wrt to least surprise: I was surprised that we allow something 
> esoteric like <cref>, but not simple things as <em>.

I'm pretty sure the allowing <cref> was in response to you.

> 2) If styling inside an italicized context is the issue: this is 
> trivially solved by styling <em> inside <em> differently. If this was 
> an issue, we'd need to disallow it inside <blockquote> as well...

That seems much more complicated than simply saying that the only 
styling allowed in <name> is monofont to call out keywords.

--Paul Hoffman