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

Re: New set of patches for 0.6.0

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 03:21:07 +0200
To: W3C Validator <www-validator@w3.org>
cc: Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
Message-ID: <20020401054611-r01050000-02061AB2-4523-11D6-8C76-00039300CF5C-1013-010c@192.168.1.7>
Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi> wrote:

>Terje, thanks for looking into my patches again; here's some comments
>and a new set of them.

A Prolific Patcher! My favourite kind! :-)


>Ok.  There may be something weird in the CVS, check.cfg and tips.cfg are
>shown in the Attic?  However, checkout of validator-0_6_0 works ok and
>fetches these files too.

The two files do not exist in HEAD as they were first checked in on the
validator-0_6_0 branch. They'll move into place when I merge.


>Also, a similar implementation for checklink.pl,

I'm trying rilly rilly hard to avoid getting involved with checklink; for
one, Hugo would be angry with me for messing with his baby -- :-) -- and I
don't really know the code so I'm keeping my ten thumbs off it for now.

In case you were wondering why none of the checklink patches were getting
applied, I mean.



>- check-paths.patch: Portability patch.

Could you explain what problem this patch is trying to solve? Is it a "on
general principle" type thing or is there some immediate problem with it?
Unless it's a showstopper I'm going to leave it out until at least right
before I declare 0.6.0 final.


>I tried the absolute URI fixup a few months ago to make validator
>easier to install locally, and found it generally possible, but the
>currently used SSI's are a problem.

EXPN? What is the problem?


>Also the http://foo/check/referer needs to be taken care
>of (at least if there is a "Revalidate" link on the page).

There is a problem with /check/referer?


>[Misc, 25,33.] - SSL/TLS and the error count seem to be already covered
>by recent updates.

You're right! Guess I should update the TODO. :-)


>[Misc, new entry] - Check if this needs a fix:
>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-validator/2002Mar/0055.html

I'll add a TODO for it until Hugo gets around to looking into it (or bribes
me with enough beer that I look into it). :-)


Thanks for the patches Ville; I'll try to have a look at them ASAP.



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

That would be ISO 261:1973.         -- John Cowan
Received on Sunday, 31 March 2002 22:46:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:01 GMT