W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > March 2002

Re: My validator patches

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 23:04:01 +0100
To: Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
cc: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20020319231437-f01050004-B382C6D9-3B86-11D6-8763-00039300CF5C-1013-010c@>
Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi> wrote:

>After taking a look at the current 0_6_0 branch all is much clearer :)

Ah, good! That means there is actually some direction to the changes I'm
making, and not just me randomly puttering around. :-)

>I (of course) had to try the newest version on that branch out, so I've
>modified my patches that were not yet applied and added a couple of new

Ok. I'll have a look when time allows.

>so I'll be dumping my patches at the URL above from now on.

Feel free to send them to the list so they'll be archived along with any
messages discussing them!

>I also tried running validator with mod_perl (actually, I thought that I
>had been doing that for the past half a year, turned out to be a nasty
>config bug => no mod_perl), and received interesting results: onsgmls
>(1.3.4, RedHat 7.2) gives me:
>Line 1, column 0: end of document in prolog ("end of document in

Yes, this looks like a bug or a quirk of mod_perl so far. I'm looking into
it, but so far I don'thave too much hope.

And let me be perfectly clear on this point: Validator does *not* run under
mod_perl! Any attempts to do so are strictly your (the generic "you") own
responsibility. It _will_ leak memory and god only knows what other kinds
of antisocial behaviour it will engage in.

The 0.6.0 branch was to be the attempt to make it behave under mod_perl,
but it looks like it may have to wait for 0.7.0.

>Side note: the current temp file handling looks nice indeed, but does
>IPC::Open3 work on Windows/others?  STDERR?

I haven't got around to checking, but thanks for reminding me. I'm not
nearly good enough about keeping `doze compatibility. I'll put checking
that it works on the TODO so it doesn't get left out.

>For all I know they probably have standards on
>which direction to put the thread on a bolt.

That would be ISO 261:1973.                                   -- John Cowan
Received on Tuesday, 19 March 2002 17:14:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 14:17:32 UTC