Fix remaining "Proposal-Style" language

[Mark Davis]

The language needs to be fixed in a number of places.
For example, in Rationale:

Independently
of the characters chosen (see next subsection), the theory is to
divide the characters that appear in Unicode into three categories:

=>

Independently of the characters chosen (see next subsection), the approach
is to divide the characters that appear in Unicode into three categories:

*Rationale. *This is not a "theory".

In general, the documents need to be reviewed to change language that was
appropriate for a proposal ("would be", "theory", "are expected to be",
"IDNA procedures themselves should neither", "prefix change would clearly
be", "IDNA2008 should prohibit") and change that language to what is
suitable for a specification or current description ("is" "approach",
"are", "IDNA procedures themselves neither", "prefix change would clearly
have been", "IDNA2008 prohibits"). A lot of this has been done, but there
are a large number of loose ends.

There are also some remaining MUSTs or SHOULDs in Rationale. These may have
been caught by now in the editors copy.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20081120/a39004b8/attachment.htm