[XML-SIG] XML testing

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Andrew Kuchling
|
| 	Any thoughts on this?

We should definitely use James Clarks suite for testing (I already
do), but I see no need to distribute it with the package. A URL will
do fine.

I also think John Mitchells comment makes a lot of sense. The testing
should definitely produce canonical XML[1] and compare it against
known good output. Possibly output from James Clarks XMLTest SAX
application with a reliable parser (XP?).

I do this for myself already on a small scale, but maybe we should do
something a bit more organized. diff, BTW, won't work, since line
breaks are replaced by 
 in canonical XML.

BTW: It should be noted that the output from validating parsers will
differ from the output from non-validating parsers, because of
whitespace normalization in attribute values.

[1] Canonical XML is already produced by the saxdemo.py application
    and defined at <URL:http://www.jclark.com/xml/canonxml.html>

-- 
"These are, as I began, cumbersome ways / to kill a man. Simpler, direct, 
and much more neat / is to see that he is living somewhere in the middle /
of the twentieth century, and leave him there."     -- Edwin Brock

 http://www.stud.ifi.uio.no/~larsga/      http://birk105.studby.uio.no/