Re: 2006-09-07 some test on unicorn

> From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
> Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 14:25:55 +0900
> Message-Id: <8C387701-4D12-4AEA-A95D-D03F7BE48081@w3.org>
> Cc: public-unicorn@w3.org
> To: Nicolas Krebs <nicolas1.krebs3@netcourrier.com>
> 

> Bonjour Nicolas,

Hello,

> On Sep 21, 2006, at 19:08 , Nicolas Krebs wrote:
> > An idea for a web validator, could be a future version of unicorn,  
> > or a
> > successor :
> > During the check of an html document, the validator does not check  
> > only
> > this one (markup, wai, embeded css etc), but also the linked document.
> > I did give some example : rss, atom, css, rdf (all linked by  
> > <link>), svg
> > (linked by <object>). I test if the specific valildator check the  
> > file (and the
> > result is "checked" for the 6), and next i test if unicorn check  
> > the file
> > if i submit only the (uri of the) embedding file (and the answer is  
> > "not checked"
> > except for css).
> 
> I see now, thanks a lot for clarifying your thoughts. I agree it is  
> an area of work which could be interesting in the future.

> > Next step in the road : even, coupled to a web site copier/mirrorer  
> > (like Httrack
> > http://www.httrack.com/), capacity to check a whole web site by  
> > just clicking
> > one command (such i can miror a whole web site with Httrack).
> > 
> My experience with e.g the W3C link checker makes me lean toward  
> disagreeing with you here.
> 
> Not that I disagree with crawling and batch-checking a site, I think  
> that's an excellent idea. But I disagree with the idea that the  
> Unicorn tool should take that on: the Unicorn, at this point at  
> least, is a web-based tool, and hence produces results in real-time.  
> Crawling and checking a whole site is, I believe, something more  
> adapted to an asynchronous, scheduled job, and hence more adapted to  
> a tool such as the log validator.
> 
> http://www.w3.org/QA/Tools/LogValidator/
> 

I did not write you should use the today unicorn tool for downolading a whole web site. 
I wrote "for [...] a future version of unicorn,  or a successor". 
The example i gave, Httrack, is not that i call a real-time and immediate-result tool. 


I take delivery of your "interesting" and "excellent idea".

Received on Friday, 6 October 2006 20:06:35 UTC