W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-evangelist@w3.org > March 2004

RE: Best Practices in HTML Re: The use of W3C standards in Denmark Part II

From: Brian Kelly <B.Kelly@ukoln.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 10:35:04 -0000
To: 'Karl Dubost' <karl@w3.org>, public-evangelist@w3.org
Message-ID: <10403101037.aa12031@lamin.ukoln.ac.uk>

Hi Karl
   Checkers, validators will be developed by both commercial vendors and by
the open source community, such as the W3C tools.
   It strikes me that something that is needed is a test suite for such
checkers.  For example I ran link checkers for several years before finding
out (using the W3C link checker) that the tool was not checking for broken
links in the <LINK> element.
   So a link checker should check for link in A, IMG, FRAME, IFRAME, etc.
HTML elements, links generated in JavaScript, links in personalised/dynamic
pages (e.g. user-agent negotiation, language negotiation, etc.)
   I think it would be useful if W3C could produce a test suite containing a
range of errors, which users & developers of checking software would test
their programs against.

Brian

---------------------------------------
Brian Kelly
UK Web Focus
UKOLN
University of Bath 
BATH
BA2 7AY
Email: B.Kelly@ukoln.ac.uk
Web: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/
Phone: 01225 383943
FOAF: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/b.kelly/foaf/bkelly-foaf.xrdf
For info on FOAF see http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/b.kelly/foaf/ 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-evangelist-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-evangelist-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Karl Dubost
> Sent: 09 March 2004 18:00
> To: public-evangelist@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Best Practices in HTML Re: The use of W3C 
> standards in Denmark Part II
> 
> 
> Le 09 mars 2004, ā 12:24, Tex Texin a écrit :
> > The solution could be as simple as define a common program 
> interface 
> > that allows people to integrate checking tools and have one command 
> > that verifies a
> 
> Agreed with an integrated tool but it takes a lot of efforts 
> and a lot of resources and engineering to create. Do not 
> forget that the validator is a volunteer effort. It is 
> developed by valuable people who are not counting their time 
> and make it true.
> 
> Without volunteers:
> 
> 	Terje Bless, Björn Höhrmann, Nick Kew,  Ville Skyttä
> 
> and Olivier Thereaux (W3C), there would be no progress at all 
> on the validator.
> See the full list (http://validator.w3.org/about.html)
> 
> A common API would be valuable.
> 
> CSS Validator is a java program
> MarkUp Validator is a perl program
> Link checker is a perl program
> 
> You have other validators around too like the RDF, there's a 
> new one developped outside of W3C which is an XForms 
> Validator (still experimental).
> 	http://xformsinstitute.com/validator/
> 
> > page using an extensible list of tools, or perhaps verifies 
> an entire 
> > web site.
> > Others could then write additional checkers that share the 
> interface 
> > (eg i18n, wai, or other checkers).
> 
> EARL as a reporting language can do that for the report and 
> combine results.
> As an input usually you have a file or an URI, there's 
> nothing much you can do.
> 
> > It would also be easier to integrate checking with 
> authoring tools. (A 
> > menu item could launch a thorough check.)
> 
> Many tools already do that. They are sending files to the 
> validators or they have syntax checking (like BBEdit), or 
> they have local validation (like emacs)
> 
> > As for your question-
> > a) list all requirements- my understanding is many of the needed 
> > checks are on todo lists...
> > I think if a start was made on the list of additional checks people 
> > would like to have, plenty of input would be offered. ;-)
> 
> Until now you said: internal links, which can be easily 
> checked automatically.
> 
> With regards to the desires of a HTML checker:
> 
> * How do you check that a "blockquote" is used for making a citation?
> * What kind of ouput would you like to see of such a tool?
> * How would you test the different requirement of that section?
> 
> 	"""
> 	For example, to specify that the character
> 	encoding of the current document is "EUC-JP",
> 	a document should include the following META
> 	declaration:
> <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=EUC-JP">
> 	The META declaration must only be used when
> 	the character encoding is organized such that
> 	ASCII-valued bytes stand for ASCII characters
> 	(at least until the META element is parsed).
> 	META declarations should appear as early as 	
> possible in the HEAD 
> element.
> 	"""
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/ W3C Conformance Manager
> *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
> 
Received on Wednesday, 10 March 2004 05:38:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 15 July 2011 00:13:22 GMT