[xml2rfc] Evolving <u (Re: [Tools-discuss] [Rfc-markdown] New xml2rfc release: v3.16.0)

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

On 2023-01-20, at 04:43, John C Klensin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> (2) Retaining the <u> element,

Obviously.

<u is a great aid for those places where supplying the code point is useful.
It can avoid rather likely clerical errors, and generally just saves work in those cases.

Note that when I’m using α or β as a name for a parameter, hitting the right code point is irrelevant (*).

<u could be improved by removing the need to have -num- in the set of expansions.
Also, an <u just with a -lit- would be an appropriate “[sic]” for reviewers.

Assuming we update 7997 such that this can be done more routinely: for routine use of non-typewriter characters such as „ or “ or — or −, a processing instruction that serves as a global “[sic]” would help linters point out any remaining actual accidents in using these.

Grüße, Carsten

(*) OK, Pete beat me up properly in private for using א and not ℵ in a recent example (involving ℵ₀) — but here it is important for authors and editors to hit the right code point; the reader doesn’t care.