W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2002

Re: Exploiting Bobby (was RE: Alternative validation tools.)

From: Nick Kew <nick@webthing.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 16:19:23 +0000 (GMT)
To: "Timothy J. Luoma" <lists@tntluoma.com>
cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0212211606440.1538-100000@jarl.webthing.com>

On Sat, 21 Dec 2002, Timothy J. Luoma wrote:

> Interesting that the W3C has been able to keep both the CSS and HTML
> validators online, up and running (with few exceptions) without these same
> problems.

On a single Linux box, that could be duplicated comfortably for $100
in todays market (that's the HTML validator - not sure about the CSS).


> I'm willing to bet they see more traffic than Bobby.

But Bobby spent its last three years or so at CAST based on very, very
broken technology.

> So why does Bobby have such trouble?  It is that much more intensive?

Having just bad-mouthed bobby, I should say in their defence that I
would reserve the right to limit access to Valet if I thought it was
being abused.  And that doesn't necessarily imply abuse of a kind
that would put a strain on the server.  OTOH, I would at least seek
to do so without flagrantly violating HTTP.  W3.org is different:
their tools are - as they can and indeed must be - explicitly
non-commercial.

-- 
Nick Kew
Received on Saturday, 21 December 2002 11:19:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:07 GMT