Re: Some suggestions for the SOAP api

Chris. wrote:

> 1.)  Adding the general warning text.  For instance:
>     <m:warnings>
>         <m:warningcount>2</m:warningcount>
>         <m:warninginfo>
>             <![CDATA[
>                  The following missing or conflicting information caused the
> validator to perform guesswork prior to validation. If the guess or fallback
> is incorrect, it may make validation results entirely incoherent. It is
> <em>highly recommended</em> to check these potential issues, and, if
> necessary, fix them and re-validate the document.
>             ]]>
>         </m:warninginfo>
>         <m:warninglist>
>             ...

Yes I agree, that would be nice and provide a kind
of "prologue" to the warnings list.

> 2.)  In a recent test, I had a document with 2 errors in the SOAP output
> (catching that number Kamir :-P). But in the HTML output there were 2 Errors
> AND an Info message all together in the Errors section of the output.
> I'm not sure how often these Info messages appear nor how useful they are.
> But, if the Validator thinks they're helpful in one interface, why not the
> SOAP interface too?

Definitely agree! The SOAP response, to paraphrase Olivier, is
supposed to give at least if not more than the same info
that the validator returns in its default output (html)

Would you please give us this URL?

I'm testing several urls for my still-in alpha stage app
and I'd like to see and treat such cases too :)
And oh, yes, I've found several funny stuff:
for eg. zeldman's website wasn't valid for a long time and
the W3C home page still has 53 CSS warnings ;-)

Innovate Humanum Est

Received on Thursday, 11 October 2007 19:03:24 UTC