- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 06:52:13 +0200
- To: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Cc: www-qa@w3.org
* Al Gilman wrote: >> If you submit a web page address to the W3C MarkUp Validator, it could >>happen that the result page tells you that your document is "Valid XHTML >>1.0 Strict" and provides a link to the XHTML 1.0 Recommendation. If you >>follow this link you will encounter a problem: There is no definition of >>what it means for a document to be identified as "Valid XHTML 1.0 >>Strict". This is an important issue for web authors and tool developers >>who care about web standards and I think the current Specification >>Guidelines draft does not sufficiently address it. > >For modular and multi-schema specifications there is complexity >that can't necessary be laid out in the manner you recommend below. I don't think so. Whether a specification uses a single or multiple normative schemas does IMO not really matter - schemas are tools not specifications. It does neither matter whether a specification is modular or not. They have conformance requirements of which a subset is machine-testable, identifying them is not all that hard. >At least if one uses EARL to spell out the conformance claims, one can be >surgically precise that the 'valid' in the clause "Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict" >is valid-to-DTD as defined in XML 1.0 and the XHTML 1.0 Strict is a >reference to the DTD, not the specification. But users typically do not understand that. >At least if all the tools we rely on for orthodoxy enforcement in our content >development chains all offered EARL output, then one could mix and match and >compose the results correctly. I've looked at EARL support for HTML Tidy but I have actually no idea how to do it. The W3C Validator reports <Assertion> <subject rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org" /> <result rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/03/earl/1.00#passes" /> <testCase rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/" /> <note>Valid!</note> </Assertion> I have for example no idea how "http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/" qualifies as a test case. It is probably a good idea to have machine readable reports but in order to implement it I would need a specification that tells me exactly how to do it.
Received on Tuesday, 9 September 2003 00:52:40 UTC