W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > February 2001

Re: Unix --> NT (source code stuff)

From: Brian Gilkison <gilkison@one.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 16:35:46 -0500
Message-Id: <200102282135.QAA18857@shell.one.net>
To: www-validator@w3.org
On Wed, 28 Feb 2001, Nick Kew wrote:
>Isn't there something at <URL:http://www.arealvalidator.com/> ?
>
>I've recently recompiled Code Valet for Windoze.  This is basically
>a web-enabled version of SP, to do validation and (many) other things
>without the need for an intervening CGI wrapper.  It uses Liam's
>mods to SP as its starting point.  I can report that it compiles cleanly
>under cygwin ( <URL:http://cygwin.sourceforge.net/> ), and would infer
>that lq-sp will almost certainly do likewise .

Well, no offense to Liam (I probably use the WDG validator as much as the
W3C when I'm not at home), but 'A Real Validator' has two flaws for my
purposes:

1) It costs $$
2) My ISP allows, among other things, use of SSI and PHP; dropping files
   onto A Real Validator can't tell me if they're valid, if they've not
   yet been processed by the server.

Since I already have an Apache server with Perl 5.6, and PHP 4.01, at home
for staging my ISP files, I'm happy with any Perl or PHP solutions (anyone
like to take a crack at a PHP validator? ;) )

My request for a binary was not for the entire validator, but rather for a
WIN32 binary of lq-nsgmls to replace James Clark's nsgmls.exe for Windows,
since that appears to be the route the W3C Validator will be taking.  I've
not coded one line of C or C++ in my life, and I don't have a compiler
readily available either -- hence the request.

Since Cygwin was mentioned, can you recommend a minimum configuration
(tools, compiler, etc.) I'd need to get a binary out of Liam's code?
Received on Wednesday, 28 February 2001 16:36:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:13:55 GMT