Re: XML validator and W3 CVS

On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Olivier Thereaux wrote:

> Nick.
> On Wednesday, Jan 22, 2003, at 08:29 Asia/Tokyo, Nick Kew wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Olivier Thereaux wrote:
> >
> >> This sounds good. However, I've been told the current practice is to
> >> use "dated space", so the xml-validator should be under
> >>
> >
> > OK, I've imported it into
> > I'm perpetually struggling with CVS, so I hope it's imported OK.
> Looks OK from here.


> > This is currently a pretty minimal import, but it's what's running
> > at and now also at
> Do you have, or need, people playing with it at this stage, other than 
> just the small qa-dev group? There's no guarantee of course, but we 
> could ask people from the XML community at W3C to test it...

Watch this space.  And hassle me if I go quiet on it.

I certainly have issues with it.  One is to improve the output:
for that I need to hack in to Xerces itself to extract the info
I'm looking for (unless someone has a better idea).  Another
is setting up the XML catalogue and lib - and that's something
I'd really like help with (I could just copy stuff from Valet,
but I *know* that's a homebrew and has gaps in it).

Apart from that, I'd really like to see it tested properly -
Eg for those of you in .jp, does it cope with CJK?  And do we
have a test corpus anywhere?   Bjoern has been my best critic,
but neither he nor I can expect to see everything.

> I'm not sure. I don't remember how far we went in our discussions about 
> sgml-lib...


Nick Kew

Received on Tuesday, 21 January 2003 21:52:19 UTC