W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > June 2009

Checklink: syntax for command-line arguments for suppressing warnings

From: Michael Ernst <mernst@cs.washington.edu>
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 21:12:25 -0700
Message-ID: <18996.30889.348413.989132@godwit.cs.washington.edu>
To: www-validator@w3.org
Having heard no objection, I will commit the patch using the separator that
is most natural for each option, rather than attempting to use the same
separator everywhere.

More specifically, the syntax will use "#" rather than " " for fragments,
as discussed in the below email.

As another example, checklink uses "->" when it outputs a directory
redirect warning message.  Therefore, it is most natural for the input to
adopt the same syntax.  It also avoids the inevitable question that would
result from the use of a space separator:  is the syntax "source target" or
"target source"?

                    -Mike

------- Start of forwarded message -------
From: Michael Ernst <mernst@alum.mit.edu>
To: www-validator@w3.org
Subject: Checklink: syntax for command-line arguments for suppressing warnings
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 21:03:45 -0700

This email is about a checklink patch that adds new flags for suppressing
warnings.  The flags are useful to prevent the checklink output from
becoming cluttered with known problems.  There is unanimous support for
this patch, but we need to decide the syntax of the command-line flag
arguments.  Let's consider the --suppress-fragment command-line flag.

One possibility for the syntax is to use an embedded "#" character:

  --suppress-fragment http://foo.com/bar.html#baz

Another possibility is to use an embedded space character:

  --suppress-fragment http://foo.com/bar.html\ baz
or
  --suppress-fragment "http://foo.com/bar.html baz"

The first possibility has the advantage of being identical to the URI that
is causing the problem, namely "http://foo.com/bar.html#baz".  This form
will look familiar even to users may not know the term "fragment".  This
syntax also makes it easy to use cut-and-paste to check this URI.  (For
instance, if the URI is no longer broken, the command-line argument is not
necessary; a user may wish to check that by hand periodically and then
adjust the command-line arguments.)

The second possibility has the advantage of using a consistent separator
everywhere.  In particular, the --masquerade command-line argument takes a
single argument that is a string with an embedded space that separates a
directory name from a URI.

Thoughts?

                    -Mike
------- End of forwarded message -------
Received on Monday, 15 June 2009 06:22:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:35 GMT