- From: Phil Ringnalda <philringnalda@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 11:04:15 -0800
- To: www-validator@w3.org
- CC: Karl Dubost <karl+w3c@la-grange.net>
On 12/30/08 2:24 PM, Karl Dubost wrote: > Both files are successfully validated by the other [Feed Validator] The easiest way to date an install of the feedvalidator software (from the outside) is from the docs. The W3C install's docs/howto/install_and_run.html points to SourceForge, so that makes it older than r751 when it changed to code.google.com, and thus is at least 20 months old and missing at least 286 commits. It does have docs/error/UndeclaredPrefix.html, added in r688, so it's not older than 27 months. (You don't need to play the "guess from the docs" game with feedvalidator.org, since it pulls from SVN every few hours.) Without looking at those 300-odd commits in more detail (many of them would have been for the Atom API validator, but as you've seen some would not), I couldn't say whether I think the W3C's feed validator install is unfortunate, or actively harmful, but without knowing anything about the process involved in getting it either updated or removed, I'm not sure it's worth the time it would take to figure out just how bad it is. Phil Ringnalda
Received on Thursday, 1 January 2009 19:05:01 UTC