On Sep 18, 2009, at 11:06 AM, Manu Sporny wrote:
(moving discussion to RDFa Task Force mailing list)
Evan Goer wrote:
PS: RDFa community - both of these issues could have been easily
avoided
if we had a conformance checker. Anybody want to volunteer to
write one?
If you do, please make sure it has an simple API we can hit -- we
might
want to call out strict RDFa conformance in our SearchMonkey
ObjectFinder. :) Ditto for the Google guys and their Rich Snippets
validator.
What kind of API would you like? Would REST-based JSON be ok? Anybody
from Google want to weigh in on what they'd want as a validator API?
So, something like:
HTTP POST to http://example.org/rdfa-validator?url=XYZ
and it would give you back something like:
[
{
"type": "warning",
"line": 2,
"column": 34
"markup": "<html ... xml:lang=\"en\">"
"message": "The attribute version=\"HTML+RDFa 1.0\" should be
specified in the <html> element at the top of your document."
},
{
"type": "warning",
"line": 1745,
"column": 65,
"markup": "<div typeof=\"Product\">"
"message": "Ignoring 'Product' in @typeof because it is an
unknown
value. Maybe you meant to use 'v:Product'?"
},
{
"type": "error",
"line": 2817,
"column": 145,
"markup": "<img about=\"#camera\" src=\"cam3.jpg>"
"message": "There is an error in your XHTML markup which may
cause
further triples to be corrupted."
},
{
"type": "summary",
"message": "There are 2 warnings and 1 error in your markup."
}
]
Would that be sufficient? Or were you thinking about something
different?
REST/JSON would be perfect.
And the output format you whipped up looks pretty good to me. The
summary at the end might be extraneous -- unless you're thinking it
could include other information besides the warning and error count?
Evan Goer
Yahoo! SearchMonkey Team
