Re: validating a validator

[dorayme]

In article <Tv6dnfMSkJ7KVn DVRVn_vwA@gigan ews.com>,
Guy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.co m/wrote:

My only responsibility is to give an honest and fair assessment
of the quality of the program, which I believe that I am well
qualified to do.

.....

Got a URL for me to test, dorayme? I envisioned you digging up
some sort of site designed to crash browsers or some such. :)

I did make a site that crashed my own browsers back in the days when
browsers and most else crashed more easily (at least on OS X). It was
a framed site that generated a lot of frames afaicr... <g>

Surely, you can just go to any of the many crummy sites on the net and
approach it thus: would Albert's program give helpful clues that the
author would benefit from attending to directly.

But I have many misgivings about objectivity in this test of yours. I do
not question your motivations. I am much more worried about the very
fact that your criteria might well be from the point of view of would it
pick up stuff that you would find helpful. And what you might find
helpful might be very different indeed to what someone less capable
would find helpful.

I just have this indelible image of brave Albert clucking innocently
into the wolves den here...

--
dorayme

[Guy Macon]

Re: validating a validator




dorayme wrote:

>
Guy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.co m/wrote:
>

>My only responsibility is to give an honest and fair assessment
>of the quality of the program, which I believe that I am well
>qualified to do.

>
>....
>

>Got a URL for me to test, dorayme? I envisioned you digging up
>some sort of site designed to crash browsers or some such. :)

>
>I did make a site that crashed my own browsers back in the days when
>browsers and most else crashed more easily (at least on OS X). It was
>a framed site that generated a lot of frames afaicr... <g>
>
>Surely, you can just go to any of the many crummy sites on the net and
>approach it thus: would Albert's program give helpful clues that the
>author would benefit from attending to directly.
>
>But I have many misgivings about objectivity in this test of yours. I do
>not question your motivations. I am much more worried about the very
>fact that your criteria might well be from the point of view of would it
>pick up stuff that you would find helpful. And what you might find
>helpful might be very different indeed to what someone less capable
>would find helpful.

Actually we already know that several less capable people have
found it to be helpful -- they have posted as much here. What
I will be looking for is whether the advice it gives leads them
in the right direction, as opposed to only seeming to be helpful.

I am curious as to how it will turn out, but I am swamped with
paying work until Friday. I can toss of a Usenet post or two
while the techicians set up the next test, but I want some
uninterupted time before I start testing software.

--
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.co m/>