On Jun 14, 2006, at 6:22 AM, Scott Reynen wrote:
On Jun 14, 2006, at 8:08 AM, Hans Gerwitz wrote:
Just to +1 Chris: I understand that validation is orthogonal for
Pingerati, but the uF community really needs a reference
validator. (Where's Pilgrim when you need him?)
I assume Mark is still working on the validator he mentioned a
while back. Meanwhile, the rest of us could help validation
efforts by creating test cases. I know Ryan and others are
collecting some tests here:
http://microformats.org/tests/
But those appear to be more parsing tests than validation tests.
What about establishing a section on the wiki where we could
collaboratively collect sample input and expected validator output
(e.g. Pass, Pass with warning "Profile not found," Fail with error
"Required property not found," etc. )?
You're right that these cover just parsing/extracting, not authoring
feedback.
I'm currently working on a microformats parser (in ruby) which I'll
hopefully soon publish open-source, which I intend to be the basis of
validator/feedback mechanism.
I'm doing my development test-driven, meaning that anything in the
parser is there because there's a test case. So, as Scott points out,
writing test cases could be *extremely* useful at this point.
I know that its not entirely clear from an outsider's perspective
(ie, outside the 2 or 3 of us who've been writing test cases) how to
get started with writing them, but if you're interested, I'm more
than willing to help you get started with it.
I intend to have full test suites which can illustrated how one
should parse and convert microformats- I think this will be a huge
help for implementors to become and stay interoperable.
-ryan
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
