W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qa-dev@w3.org > August 2005

Re: check with SGML::Parser::OpenSP (and branches)

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 21:16:37 +0200
To: QA Dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <d0202000b-1042-5944936359944BF99E76BDB833BAF22D@[193.157.66.12]>

Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi> wrote:

>Yep... but let's get a decision whether we want to support running
>validator 0.8+ _without_ some version of mod_perl, first, ok? :)

I don't want to drop support for running as a plain CGI just yet.

But as Björn points out, making optimizations for running as CGI are probably
not a good idea; or, contrariwise, such optimizations might well be made but
then should probably be unconditional.


>Support for running without mod_perl means keeping stuff so generic
>anyway that I think the m_p 1 vs 2 vs both question is moot.

Do we see any clear wins in moving to a more “native” mod_perl API? i.e. does
dropping CGI support — the generic API that moots mod_perl 1 vs. 2 — actually
gain us anything?

-- 
"The woods are lovely, dark, and deep; But I have promises to keep,
 And miles to go before I sleep; And miles to go before I sleep..."

            -- Robert Frost, "Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening"
Received on Thursday, 18 August 2005 19:16:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 19 August 2010 18:12:45 GMT