jpl@bat.nrtc.northrop.com (Jeff P. Lankford) (05/30/91)
I have built a parser that can analyze the syntax of SGML documents. However, i know there are some defects (and i expect a lot more i don't know about). In order to find those i'm currrently unaware of (lots i'm sure), i'd like to form a collection of valid and specific invalid SGML documents to serve as a regression test data base. I believe there is a CALS testing service, but my parser isn't stable enough for formal, rigorous (and costly?) testing. If I collect enough useful samples, I will make them available via anonymous FTP archive. Jeffrey P. (Jeff) Lankford 213/544-5394 Northrop Research and Technology Center, Palos Verdes, CA 90274
erik@naggum.no (Erik Naggum) (06/19/91)
Jeff P. Lankford <jpl@bat.nrtc.northrop.com> writes: | | I have built a parser that can analyze the syntax of SGML documents. | However, i know there are some defects (and i expect a lot more i | don't know about). In order to find those i'm currrently unaware of | (lots i'm sure), i'd like to form a collection of valid and specific | invalid SGML documents to serve as a regression test data base. There is something called "the 'gonzo' test", about which all I know is that GCA says "all conforming SGML parsers MUST be able to parse this test" in a blurb about "The XGML Validator (TM)", about which I know very little. (What does the "X" stand for? Why not use "S"?) Does anybody have more information on this "gonzo" test? </Erik> -- Erik Naggum Professional Programmer +47-2-836-863 Naggum Software Electronic Text <erik@naggum.no> 0118 OSLO, NORWAY Computer Communications <enag@ifi.uio.no>