Make NOTEs non-normative #2196
Merged
Make NOTEs non-normative #2196
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
emlun
requested review from
MasterKale,
timcappalli,
selfissued,
nadalin and
akshayku
…icator extensions
emlun
force-pushed
the
issue-1979-notes
branch
from
6c5c575 to
72d47d0
Compare
akshayku
approved these changes
Nov 13, 2024
selfissued
approved these changes
Nov 13, 2024
|
@nadalin Did you have review comments on this? |
MasterKale
approved these changes
Dec 11, 2024
nadalin
approved these changes
Dec 18, 2024
|
@emlun Please Merge |
github-actions bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 8, 2025
SHA: 15cebd7 Reason: push, by selfissued Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes #1979.
This changes some NOTEs into normative text, and "promotes" some occurrences of "must" and "should" to their RFC 8174-enforced uppercase forms; thus formally speaking this introduces new normative language to the spec. But I have done my best to preserve what I interpret as the spirit of the existing language, so I think one can argue that these still count as "just" editorial changes.
Preview | Diff