Re: [PATCH] appendix C checker

On 7/6/06, olivier Thereaux <> wrote:
> On Jul 4, 2006, at 17:07 , Jean-Guilhem Rouel wrote:
> > I think there is a problem with the "Unicorn output" : there should be
> > an enclosing error/warning/miscmessage tag for each
> > error/warning/miscmessage produced in the output_message_xml function.
> Indeed, good catch.
> One thing I noticed when doing this patch: what was your rationale
> for the usage of <miscmessages> (etc.)? I would have probably reused
> <informations> (and infocount, infolist, info), as used at least in
> the Feed validator.

The only reason is that we didn't know this validator, so we had to
find a name, miscmessage was the first coming to our minds. If you
want, we can change this.

> Generally speaking, since the unicorn response format is coming after
> the ones used in markup, css and feed validation services, two (and a
> half) of which are in production, we should try and keep as close as
> possible to these.
> --
> olivier

Received on Thursday, 6 July 2006 08:17:20 UTC