Mabel,
On Jul 13, 2009, at 2:56 PM, Mabel Liang wrote:
Mark,
Wow, a question I actually know something about!
Look at these:
WAVE http://wave.webaim.org/
Cynthia http://www.contentquality.com/
Bobby (now incorporated into Rational software)
http://www.cast.org/products/Bobby/index.html
Bobby was a good one, (although Google searches show articles casting
aspersions on it...). But it was bought and is no longer free.
I can try and find out info about some other validators.
1) Are you looking for a no-cost option?
2) It looks like you want something that you can link your code to? A
quick look at the WAVE page makes it look like you might be able to do
something.
My goal is to validate the UI html automatically. We currently have
some automated build loops that run every time code is checked into
SVN. They take the module and execute the unit tests (just like "perl
Makefile.PL; make; make test; make dist" would do). The UI team wants
to get in on the fun and have their HTML automatically validated in
the same process. Perhaps if we came up with an effective process, I
might even use Test::WWW::Mechanize to hit the app and verify the
final page output.
As for what I'm specifically looking for, it would probably be the
following:
1) Free.
2) Pure-Perl (if possible).
3) Easily used from a unit test script in the "t" directory of the
module (easy to setup, easy to call).
The last two are ideal. If I found a C package that was easy to
install and reasonably good compared to the W3C service, it might be
good enough (if it was easy enough to install/use).
I found the browse/download link for the W3C validator--my, that's a
big script :-/ And it looks like configuring it would be kind of
involved. I thought maybe I could download it and include it (perhaps
even wrapped), but it looks like more work than I'm willing to put in
for this.
I like the idea of HTML::Lint, as it is simple, small, and easy to use/
install. The debate (internally on our development team) is whether
HTML::Lint is "good enough" for our automated verification. For my
part, if HTML::Lint captures 90% of the issues, that would be just
fine; the UI team begs to differ ;-)
The links you provided seem similar to the W3C validator--a web
service I would have to call. I guess I may just have to break down
and do that, but it would add further to the overhead and time for
validating a changeset (i.e. if the web is slow or down, my tests are
either going to be slow or failing/skipping). I'd prefer something
running on the box in memory, but so far all I have found are wrappers
for making calls to the W3C service (or to one that you install/
configure locally as a internal web service).
Thanks!
Matt
--
Matt Luker
*/rsh tech
your source for programming know-how
phone: 617.418.3480
email: [email protected]
web: http://www.rshtech.com/
_______________________________________________
Boston-pm mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
