[imps] Another validation result format for review

[Thomas Broyer]

Hi Henri,

2007/9/12, Henri Sivonen:
> I'd like to enable the use of Validator.nu as a RESTful Web service.
> To this end, I have designed a Validator.nu-native JSON response format:
> http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Validator.nu_JSON_Output

I just skimmed through your two docs and the first comment that came
to mind is: why is he using types/subtypes rather than a few more
types?
type:info, no subtype => type:info
type:info, subtype:warning => type:warning
type:error, no subtype => type:error
type:error, subtype:fatal => type:fatal-error
type:non-document-error, no subtype => type:non-document-error
type:non-document-error, subtype:io => type:io-error
type:non-document-error, subtype:schema => type:schema-error
type:non-document-error, subtype:internal => type:internal-error

My second comment is: it seems the "indeterminate" result is dependent
upon a non-document-error message; couldn't they be merged? I.e.
there's no type:non-document-error and, if a "non document error"
happen, the result:indeterminate has specific properties related to
the "non document error" which leaded to this state. Example in JSON:
"result": {
    "type": "indeterminate",
    "errors": [
        { "type": "io", "message": "...", "url": "..." }
    ],
}

> I'd appreciate comments on the format--especially from people who can
> foresee wanting to write clients.

I'm not such a person, but I thought you could nevertheless be
interested by my comments ;-)

-- 
Thomas Broyer