Subject: RE: Conformance Test for HTTP 1.1

From: Miles Sabin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 10:24:14 +0100

Mark Nottingham wrote,
> I've lately been considering starting discussion of 
> development of something within the W3C, as it was involved 
> in the development of the HTTP, and has an established 
> history of developing similar tools (although I'm not sure if
> W3C can formally commit resources).
>
> If anyone has any thoughts about this, please share them, 
> because I'd like to get this moving.

This sounds like a fine idea (tho', as you say, it's an open
question whether or not the W3C would be able to commit
resources).

Do you have any particular emphasis in mind: server, clients,
or proxies, or all equal weight on all?

Cheers,

Miles

-- 
Miles Sabin                       Cromwell Media
Internet Systems Architect        5/6 Glenthorne Mews
+44 (0)20 8817 4030               London, W6 0LJ, England
[email-masked]          http://www.cromwellmedia.com/

---

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 09:30:53 -0700

I think proxies are the biggest target, because they're so hard to implement
correctly, and so much more complex. In my experience, there's a fairly wide
variance in how implementors choose to interpret the spec.

Of course, once you do one for proxies, it's relatively easy to get client
and server test suites out of it.

-- 
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/

---

From: "Caveman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 15:54:58 -0500

I just want to put my two cents into this conversation:

I think the idea of doing compliancy testing is great.  And the idea of
having one "check everything test" is also a good thought.  However, how do
we guarantee that the test scenarios created are actually following the
"specs"?

I think this is something better left to outside agencies to address.  The
testing game tends to get to be too industry biased.  Whether intentionally
or not you will see tests similar to this proposed one done and get totally
different results depending on who does it.

I know this actually sounds like a good argument to create a "standard
test", but in my opinion this leads the doorway too wide open to start
skewing the tests in favor of one manufacturer/developer vs. another one.  I
realize that there are currently many industry leaders involved in this
organization and they provide valuable insights.  However, they are just
involved in the CREATION of standards, not in judging the conformance to
them.

In short, while this is a good idea with the best interests of everyone in
mind, I think this is probably stepping outside of the charter of the
organization.

-kh

---

From: Mark Nottingham <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 14:13:54 -0700

> mind, I think this is probably stepping outside of the charter of the

These are pretty much the arguments that I remember people making at WREC in
Pittsburgh, and I think it's a good point. This is why I'm holding out hope
for the W3C...

-- 
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/