A couple more link rel test cases: http://www.snellspace.com/public/linkreltest.xml
See the bottom of: http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/LinkConformanceTests - James A. Pagaltzis wrote: > * James Holderness <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-04-25 22:15]: >> The aggregator developers are actively hostile towards such >> tests. > > Really? I can only think of counterexamples, though my sample is > admittedly tiny. Who are the hostile ones? > > Personally, as someone who has written patches for an aggregator > and is flirting with the idea of building one, I would be very > glad to have a defined target to aim at instead of just > eyeballing the overlap between the spec and the code. What sort > of motivation would compel a developer to be hostile toward > tests? > >> Feed producers probably find informational tests more helpful >> than conformance tests. > > But they are the ones who stand to gain from consistent and > complete implementation of the standard, in the long term. > > In any case, can’t we even rally four or five people from the WG > who care enough about the spec to want to do something likely to > increase the chance of good implementations? Where are those who > participated in the interminable flamewars brought on by every > rathole that lay on the way to RFC4287? Have they stopped caring > now, or was all that vitriol just bikeshed painting after all? > > Regards,
