RE: Bug 508 fix and more about CatalogResolver

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-mobileok-checker-request@w3.org [mailto:public-mobileok-
> checker-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Sean Owen
> Sent: 16 October 2007 14:50
> To: Miguel Garcia
> Cc: public-mobileok-checker
> Subject: Re: Bug 508 fix and more about CatalogResolver
> 
> 
> What was the change to commons-httpclient-3.1.jar, anyone know? I had
> put in the final 3.1 release a few days ago and want to make sure we
> use that.

Mea culpa

I found I had updated and ended up with an "ascii" version, which after
a couple of seconds messing around and hosing on the server I thought I
should replace with a fresh copy.

> 
> Several tests seem to fail now due to changes in counting of
> whitespace? Measures #1 also fails because a CSS file is no longer
> invalid. These may be fine and the test results can be regenerated but
> I wanted to check. In general it's good to check in changes to the
> tests too with changes to the code.
> 
> On 10/16/07, Miguel Garcia <miguel.garcia@fundacionctic.org> wrote:
> > We find that CatalogResolber wasn't running properly because mobile
> > checker was downloading the DTDs files in order to do grammar
> > validation. We discover that in the CatalogManager.properties file
the
> > catalogs property, which refers to the catalog.xml file, had an
absolute
> > path. We have changed it to a relative path and commited the file,
> > please ensure that now is working properly particularly in
non-Windows
> > SO.
> 
> Ack, that is my fault. I accidentally committed this change during
> testing to make sure the relative vs. absolute path was not the issue.
> Thank you for fixing it.
> 
> But, now it seems like the DTDs are being retrieved remotely for me
> again. I will have to investigate.
> 
> > We think this jar could be lighten (is about 7.5Mb) by removing
tomcat
> > and junit classes because they are not needed as junit test files
are
> > not included, or is this a slip and junit test are expected to be in
the
> > jar file?
> 
> You're right, I have just checked in a change to not include these.
> 
> 
> For the moment we can't release until the above is resolved but it is
> close.

A couple of moki comments coming in a following mail.

Jo

Received on Tuesday, 16 October 2007 13:55:49 UTC