For consistency, the ARIA spec and all the AAM documents (Core, HTML, SVG, AccName, etc.) should use the terms "normative" and "non-normative" (as opposed to "informative", which some of them currently use). The non-normative status of a section should be declared using the feature in Respec that takes care of this, i.e. applying class="informative" to the relevant <section>.

Respec adds the following text to the "Conformance" section of the document:

"As well as sections marked as non-normative, all authoring guidelines, diagrams, examples, and notes in this specification are non-normative. Everything else in this specification is normative.

The key words [list of  RFC2119 key words used in the document] are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]."

Drawing on what's currently in the Core-AAM, I propose we supplement the Respec text with the following:

"These RFC2119 key words are formatted in uppercase and contained in a strong element with class="rfc2119". When these key words are used, but do not share this format, they do not convey any formal conformance requirements in the RFC2119 sense, and are merely explanatory, i.e., informative. As much as possible, such usage is avoided in this specification.

The classification of a section as normative or non-normative applies to the entire section and all sub-sections of that section.

Normative sections provide requirements that authors, user agents, and assistive technologies MUST follow for an implementation to conform to this specification.

Non-normative sections provide information useful to understanding the specification. Such sections may contain examples of recommended practice, but it is not required to follow such recommendations in order to conform to this specification."