"David A. Wheeler" <xxxxxx@dwheeler.com> writes:
> Mark H Weaver:
>> The current draft says:
>> > 5. An unprefixed ( . e) MUST evaluate as e.
>>
>> s/MUST evaluate as/MUST be read as/
>
> I agree that the word "evaluate" here is misleading, so yes, we should
> fix that to clarify things.  However, the rest of the text uses "maps
> to" or its abbreviation =>.  So for consistency with the rest of the
> text, it should probably instead say something like this:
>
> .... 5. An unprefixed ( . e) MUST map to e.

Agreed.

> I propose accepting the HTML tagging, and changing the line about
> unprefixed (. e) to use the term "map" like everything else does.  Any
> other last-minute comments?

These are probably not worth uploading a new version for, but in case
any other changes are made, here are some more minor markup tweaks
consistent with my last patch.

    Regards,
      Mark