Re: Another viewpoint on validation

On 9 April 2012 10:53, Jeremias Maerki <dev@jeremias-maerki.ch> wrote:
> Aren't we touching multiple topics in this thread?
> 1. XSL-FO validation
> 2. XSL-FO spec coverage by individual implementations
> 3. XSL-FO interoperability between implementations

Good point.

Taking the Linux approach, what are the constituent parts?

Validation of an fo file to the rec (somehow)
formatter X does A not B.... or should that be more specific?
 E.g. Does formatter X do everything in MY fo file?
interop.... Is this flogging a dead horse? Waste of time?
I'd prefer the conformance approach... somehow.


I certainly like the idea of a small number of single
focus 'tests' or specs or whatever.


>
> I agree with Arved that running an actual FO processor is probably the
> best way to validate XSL-FO, even though there are interpretation
> differences among the implementations. Many implementations have
> a relaxed implementation of the spec: they often don't complain about an
> empty table-cell, for example. As a result, many FO editors actually
> produce non-conforming XSL-FO because their creators haven't read the
> spec closely enough or just haven't run into an error message by their
> favorite (or own) FO processor.

Is that something we should address at the spec level? I.e. it isn't
clear enough?
Do we have sufficient input to do this?

>
> For spec coverage, we could probably develop an XML format here. But I
> doubt that many implementors will participate here (think "exslfo"). I'm
> sure that tooling around this could add some value: product comparison,
> for example. But some implementors might not be interested to have that
> done publicly. OTOH, it's obviously a big desire on the user side when
> evaluating products.

Yes, I too think this is doable, with much work and would benefit
the users, eventually the formatter writers.


>
> Finally, interoperability improvements between implementations takes a
> serious effort for a comprehensive, publicly available XSL-FO test suite.
> But even with a test suite, it will be difficult to compare
> interoperability and spec coverage.

If we get to that stage, it is time to look at clarification of the spec.


regards



-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
Docbook FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk