W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > December 2012

Re: Proposal: Polyglot validation in degrees - not boolean

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 21:30:12 +0100
To: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>
Cc: public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <20121211213012025683.79765ad3@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Jirka Kosek, Tue, 11 Dec 2012 13:15:18 +0100:
> On 11.12.2012 12:04, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
> 
>>   3. Best Practice conformance checkers should therefore present
>>      the result as a list and as "degree of conformance". Some
>>      good practises (like redundant encoding declaration), should
>>      lead to "extra points" and thus be considered as "more than
>>      conformance", from Polyglot Markup’s point of view.
> 
> I think it will be very hard to rate such "degrees of conformance" as
> people have different views on what's good practice.

Why would that be very hard? I don't think Polyglot Markup is unclear 
about what polyglot is. Also I did not mean to grade - like in school. 
Just to inform the author whether it meets the requirements or not. 
Let's say there are 10 criteria for being polyglot. Then the validator 
could inform which of those your code conforms to.

>>  A) that polyglot conformance-checking would become of value also 
>>     for those that don’t aim for full polyglot conformance, which
>>     in turn could broaden the interest within the HTMLwg as well;
> 
> It would be nice if validators can check conformance to polyglot
> requirements. However as polyglot markup is suitable for very specific
> cases I don't think that seeing how much close to polyglot your document
> is would be very useful metrics.

The development of a validator is not up to me. But Henri’s reply 
indicates to me that degrees of conformance *could* be interesting.[1]

[1] 
http://www.w3.org/mid/CAJQvAuet8UZh8YmpAsRRr-POF1eG=4wSZhhugFQ5ei3a-XHx1w@mail.gmail.com

-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2012 20:30:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 11 December 2012 20:30:40 GMT