We need to handle uppercase and lowercase.

... and what about equivalent forms, e.g., "need to be"? See Clause 7 at https://www.iso.org/sites/directives/current/part2/index.xhtml

We need to handle uppercase and lowercase.

Addressed in c17ea95

... and what about equivalent forms, e.g., "need to be"? See Clause 7 at https://www.iso.org/sites/directives/current/part2/index.xhtml

I'm using this text from the Conformance clause we use:

Normative text is text that describes elements of the design that are indispensable or contains the 
conformance language keywords: "shall", "should", or "may". Informative text is text that is potentially 
helpful to the user, but not indispensable, and can be removed, changed, or added editorially without 
affecting interoperability. Informative text does not contain any conformance keywords

I would argue that the keywords are what are usually used, and need to be flagged. Past that it's an editorial thing, and I cannot recall ever seeing any of those equivalents in a SMPTE doc TBH. Also, do EGs docs NEED to conform to ISO guidelines for equivalent forms? I'm just using the OM as a baseline as a first pass.

use for...of when the body of the loop is huge.

I tired this the first time around, but the element links don't pass through via the logger_.error messages.

That should work:

const list = document.querySelectorAll("input[type=checkbox]");
for (const checkbox of list) {
  checkbox.checked = true;
}

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/NodeList#example

This is updated in fc85e00

The logic i have catches the sections that are to be excluded from the searching. This update only highlights those sections, and doesn't continue the search past those.

The logic is right. I think the following code style:

while () {

  if (bad) continue;

  Do a lot of things;
}

is easier to read and maintain than:

while () {

  if (not bad) {
    Do a lot of things;
  }
}

because Do a lot of things; can be big and you have to remember you are in a particular condition.

Sorry, yea understood. I meant the or and and combination. I did the same thing you mention with return; in the last update.

updated in fc85e00