W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > January 2007

Re: PHP Library to the HTML Validator API

From: Brett Bieber <brett.bieber@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 07:41:08 -0600
Message-ID: <efa010fb0701090541h50da7f4exd6f0c73a7b15916c@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Karl Dubost" <karl@w3.org>
Cc: www-validator@w3.org

On 1/9/07, Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org> wrote:
> Hi Brett,
> That's cool.
> Le 4 janv. 2007 à 07:41, Brett Bieber a écrit :
> > http://pear.php.net/package/Services_W3C_HTMLValidator/
> More context from the page
>      Description
>      This package provides an object oriented
>      interface to the API of the W3 HTML Validator application
>      (http://validator.w3.org/). With this package you can connect
>      to a running instance of the validator and retrieve the
>      validation results (true|false) as well as the errors and
>      warnings for a web page.
>       By using the SOAP 1.2 output format from the validator, you
>      are returned simple objects containing all the information
>      from the validator. With this package it is trivial to build
>      a validation system for web publishing.
> > Usage example:
> > <?php
> > require_once 'Services/W3C/HTMLValidator.php';
> > $v = new Services_W3C_HTMLValidator();
> > var_dump($v->validate('http://www.unl.edu/'));
> > ?>
> Have you thought about a cache system?
> In a workflow, the validation would occur only if the content of the
> page or one of the ancestors has been really modified. To avoid to
> request validation of pages or content already validated.

The process you describe is something which I've thought about
implementing, but not within the context of my PEAR library. My need
for the library is to build an automated validation of pages for
departments at a university. We've assembled a QA committee to approve
sub-sites which adopt our University's web templates, and the items
which can be machine validated will be handled before the QA committee
examines a site in detail.

To that end, we will build a small system to handle the workflow you
describe - but a system like this would be more of an application
instead of a re-usable library. (In short, I question that PEAR would
approve it to be added to the repository)

Caching the results could easily be handled by PEAR's Cache_Lite
package, and it wouldn't take much time to add in. This is probably
the route I will take when building our automated system.

I DO plan on publishing what we build and distributing it through our
own PEAR channel (http://pear.unl.edu/). But keep in touch if you or
anyone else is interested in an automated site validation system built
in PHP.

-Brett Bieber

http:saltybeagle.com aim:ianswerq
Received on Tuesday, 9 January 2007 13:41:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 14:17:50 UTC