Re: latest xmlproc module available?

We followed Dom's instructions and solved that problem.
I will let you know once my company or some of the engineers make up minds
on how to take part in the task force.
Hope I can work with you and your working group together.

Thank you all for your help.

2007/6/13, Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>:
>
>
> Can I just add to what Dom says here - to say that we're delighted to hear
> that you are working on a checker. We'd strongly prefer that people base any
> work on the new initiative that Dom refers to below - rather than the
> existing implementation. Also as Dom says, we would very much welcome your
> participation in the work of the checker Task Force.
>
> May thanks
> Jo Rabin
>
> (BPWG co-chair)
>
> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Checker/Overview.html
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-mobileok-checker-request@w3.org [mailto:public-mobileok-
> > checker-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Dominique Hazael-Massieux
> > Sent: 12 June 2007 14:20
> > To: Hyucheol Kim
> > Cc: public-mobileok-checker@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: latest xmlproc module available?
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Le mardi 12 juin 2007 à 14:33 +0900, Hyucheol Kim a écrit :
> > > Currently we are developing a Korean version of Mobile Web Best
> > > Practices checker.
> > > We are using open source version of Mobile Web Best Practices
> > > checker(http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/mwbp-validator/) for our
> > > project.
> > >
> > > We found a bug in XML Well-formedness checking.
> > >
> > > But according to the configuration part of the installation
> > > instructions
> > >
> > > (http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/mwbp-
> > validator/doc/install.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8),
> > >
> > > this bug was fixed. But we are still having the same bug.
> > >
> > >  I assume that is version of checker is using later version of
> > > modified xmlproc module than that of
> > >
> > > the http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2006/mwbp-validator/ version.
> > >
> > >
> > > I couldn't update that module since the latest version is only
> > > available to the Working Group members.
> > >
> > > Is it possible to use that module for our project? If it is can you
> > > tell me how to get it?
> >
> > Actually, the current BP checker is the one in CVS - no part of it is
> > restricted to Working Group Members.
> >
> > With regard to the bug you referred to, the bug is in fact in the
> > python-xml package (which is developed outside of this project
> > completely), and which unfortunately doesn't seem to be maintained any
> > longer - thus why the bug report URI doesn't work any longer.
> >
> > If that can helps, it looks like the bug fix is simply a matter of
> > modifying the xmlutils.py file in that package, by adding the line
> >               self.datasize = len(self.data)
> > right after the line:
> >                 self.data = self.charset_converter(self.data)
> > in the parse_xml_decl function (around line 722).
> >
> > That said, you may be interesting to know that there is an ongoing
> > effort to redevelop a better software to check compliance with the Best
> > Practices (or more accurately, to mobileOK Basic); this work is done in
> > cooperation between a few of the W3C BPWG members (Google, dotMobi,
> > Fundaction CTIC, 7val, and W3C), to create a more reliable and more
> > accurate library that can be used as a basis for other tools, including
> > a renewed W3C mobileOK checker.
> >
> > You can learn more about this on-going project at:
> > http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/Checker/Overview.html
> >
> > In particular, the in-development Java code for this new library is also
> > available in our public CVS repository at:
> > http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2007/mobileok-ref/
> >
> > Should you be interested in participating in that effort, please let us
> > know, and we would be happy to give more details on this.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Dom
> >
> >
>
>


-- 
김휴철   Hyucheol Kim
Vice President
Cakesoft Inc.
www.cakesoft.net
www.veryfineweb.com
tel) 050-2357-0701
fax) 050-2357-0703