Do we ever need a test suite

Peter Murray-Rust peter at
Wed Oct 29 01:43:43 GMT 1997

At 09:53 28/10/97 -0800, Tim Bray wrote:
>I am working on the last missing pieces in Lark (PE processing, yecch), and 

Great news, Tim. Here is some moral support for the midnight hours.

>is it ever becoming obvious that we need a test suite.  Michael 
>Sperberg-McQueen made a few beginnings on this some time back, producing 
>the invaluable torture.xml (can *your* parser do that one?).  I remember
>that way back when, Omnimark produced this massive SGML test suite
>on CD-ROM as I recall.  If someone wanted to do the same for XML, they'd
>be doing the world a service, and there might even be some money in it.

I support this call, though I haven't time myself. I also take the
opportunity to ask - very gently - what the present position of the various
'public' parsers is. [I have long ago given up trying to keep JUMBO's
trivial parser up-to-date
and use it only for files I create myself in 'simple XML'. For serious work
I piggyback on the other parsers which can be called as an argument to
JUMBO's commandline (e.g. parser="Lark").

How are the parser-writers getting on with working under Xapi-J? If I could
rely on this, I would hack the corresponding bit of JUMBO so that any
conforming parser could be used.


Peter Murray-Rust, Director Virtual School of Molecular Sciences, domestic
net connection
VSMS, Virtual Hyperglossary

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at
Archived as:
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list