W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qa-dev@w3.org > April 2006

Re: validator modularization (aka unicorn) and micro-observers framework

From: Jean-Guilhem Rouel <ze.reaper@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:39:26 +0200
Message-ID: <f44d2d630604270539i3d8a65e3w53db27e93635b40f@mail.gmail.com>
To: "QA Dev" <public-qa-dev@w3.org>
On 4/26/06, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> The model would have "What is this" and "Who should handle this". Who
> should handle something is a subset of "Who can handle this". I'm not
> sure the sets are equivalent. As an example, in the following XSLT
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt#result-element-stylesheet the content "is"
> XHTML and XSLT at the same time, but should only be processed by the
> XSLT checker. Another example is link checking, while sometimes you
> might want to check for conformance and broken links at the same time,
> e.g. when the W3C Webmaster checks a document against pubrules, you
> typically just want to check for conformance.
>

In fact, when I was saying "I can handle it", I was also thinking about a
sort of priority.
For example, the link checker would have a lower priority for XHTML
documents than the markup validator... So if someone asks only for a link
check on a XHTML document, the link checker will be called. If we also ask
for a markup validation, then the markup validator will process the document
(because it has a higher priority on (X)HTML documents) and give the content
of 'a' tags to the link checker.
Another possibility would be to always delegate the parsing of a document to
the "best" observer (even if we are not interested in waht it checks and
have to forget the result of the check or validation).
Received on Thursday, 27 April 2006 12:39:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 19 August 2010 18:12:46 GMT