W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > June 2002

Re: Updated validator patches

From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 01:59:24 +0200
To: Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
cc: www-validator@w3.org
Message-ID: <r01050300-1015-2AFA2BF5818511D6BB0200039300CF5C@[]>

Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi> wrote:

>I've updated my validator patches

And I've applied everything that was in your patches directory (still
modulo the checklink stuff). I'm not entirely sure I like the mod_perl
patch, but I applied it anyway as I don't have any specific reason for why
it rubbed me the wrong way. I may renge and do it differently at some
point, but for now it went in unchanged.

Many many thanks for your contributions, Ville! I really appreciate it!

BTW, I'd appreciate it if you'd put a note somewhere for patches that do
more then one thing. It saves me time trying to figure out what relevance
those changes have. :-)

Incidentally, I'm getting close to declaring this thing beta. I'll be on
the road for most of next week, but when I get back I'll do a catchup round
for any known problems and run regression tests followed by tagging a beta
in CVS. Any patches for new stuff that y'all want in for the next update
had better be in my mailbox by this next friday or they'll most likely be
put on hold for the next cycle. Bug fixes and such will of course still be

And G****d popped up out of nowhere on #validator and announced he'd
updated some stuff on v.w3.org. The net result is that current devel is now
actually running on :8001. Once I reach "beta" I'll announce it here and
ask people to pound on it for a while. Anyone wishing to get a head start
on the pounding should feel free to go ahead. :-)


I'm in particular looking for Accessibility issues and suggestions for how
to improve the layout of the results page. The latter is both "loud" and
"noisy", visually speaking, and could use some tweaking. Mainly I think
I've stared myself blind at it because I can't really see any way out of
the current mess (without a radical redesign of the whole layout, that is).

As a sort of a teaser pre-announce, you can try adding ";output=xml",
";output=earl", or ";output=n3", to the URL of any results page. Neither
version is particularly "smart" and those formats _will_ change, but
they're there for anyone wanting to play (Chris?). If anyone wants to try
implementing a client for those and give me feedback I'd be tremendously
gratefull. Right now they're mainly toys and I want to see if they're
actually usefull for anything. :-)

We've gotten to a point where a human-readable,   human-editable text format
for structured data has become a complex nightmare where somebody can safely
say  "As many threads on xml-dev have shown, text-based processing of XML is
hazardous at best" and be perfectly valid in saying it.      -- Tom Bradford
Received on Sunday, 16 June 2002 20:00:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:58:28 UTC