On 10 August 2016 at 17:06, Barry Leiba <barryleiba(_at_)computer(_dot_)org>
wrote:
>> XML format and screen readers.
>>
>> I have not looked deeply into the final RFC-format XML spec.
>> Does it already markup SHOULD/MUST/MAY in some useful way?
>> Could it? If it does, should this document point out this?
> That's a good point, and I will look into what this might need to say
> with respect to the XML markup.
Thank you!
I think that markup on these keywords would help screen readers if they learn
to use the XML instead.
I have checked, and I propose this change to the draft:
OLD
=== NEW ===
In many standards track documents several words are used to signify
the requirements in the specification. These words are often
capitalized, as shown below, but they do not have to be. This
document defines how these words are interpreted in IETF documents
when the words are capitalized.
NEW
=== NEW ===
In many standards track documents several words are used to signify
the requirements in the specification. These words are often
capitalized, as shown below, but they do not have to be. This
document defines how these words are interpreted in IETF documents
when the words are capitalized and/or marked as <bcp14> in the
XML source (see [draft-iab-xml2rfc], Section 2.9).
END
You also need to change the text for authors to include in this case.
A document will (one hopes) use either CAPITALIZATION or
<bcp14>markup</bcp14> but not a mixture. I'd propose, therefore, that
two sets of text be offered for use by authors. The alternate might
be:
<t>The key words "<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST
NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>",
and
"<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>" in this document are to be interpreted as
described in
BCP 14 <xref anchor="RFC2119"/>,<xref anchor="RFCxxxx"/> when,
and only when, they appear
styled as shown.</t>
The reference to draft-iab-xml2rfc would be informative. Comments?
Barry