This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
Editorial. Not sure this falls under the editor's discretion, or whether it is an actual (layout) error in the spec: the second and third paragraph under the first Note under 3.3. Extension Attributes contains several mandatory MUSTs, MAYs, MUST NOTs and a REQUIRED. Since a Note is considered non-normative, and capital MUST/MAY etc are considered normative, this seems to be contradictory. Perhaps only the first paragraph was originally meant as Note? This layout is the same in XSLT 2.0.
Thanks. The query //note[.//rfc2119] picks up a number of further instances of this inconsistency, which I will fix.
I have removed all RFC markup from notes. Most of it was doing no harm: it was either "mays" and "shoulds" which don't really have any normative force anyway, or "musts" that explained the consequences of "musts" already stated normatively. But removing the markup avoids any arguments.