René's URL Explorer Experiment

{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"DiscussionForumPosting","headline":"verify.py exit status should reflect validation status","articleBody":"I'm filing this as a bug because of a mismatch in behavior I expect from experience with another tool that performs a semantically similar function on a different input format.\r\n\r\nIf `verify.py` identifies semantic issues in data, such as a term found in an input file that does not exist in the glossary, a note is made in the output, but the program exits\r\nwith status `0`.  \r\n\r\nIn contrast, another tool that performs a validation function, `xmllint` with the `--schema` argument, exits `0` only if the input XML document adheres to the specified schema.  If there is any deviation from the schema, `xmllint` exits `1`.  (Without the `--schema` argument, `xmllint` exits `1` if the input is malformed XML.)\r\n\r\nI personally expect a tool that validates content against a specification to exit non-`0` if the input document does not adhere to the specified format/schema/vocabulary.  Exitin\r\ng `0` for non-adhering content can give a false sense of content validation.  I've had to resort to running `grep` on the output log for patterns I know indicate incorrect content, as a post-processing step.\r\n\r\nWhat should the default behavior of `verify.py` be?\r\n\r\n* Exit non-`0` on non-adhering content, by default?\r\n* Exit non-`0` on non-adhering content, if a `--strict` flag is passed?\r\n* Continue current behavior (only exiting non-`0` if the command line is malformed), perhaps including documentation on how to identify incorrect content flagged in the output stream?\r\n* Continue current behavior, but add a mechanically recognizable/parseable summary statement at the end saying \"Content passes\" or \"Content fails\"?\r\n\r\nI personally vote for the first, though I think the fourth is followed in other validating programs.  (I don't have a Schematron instance handy to check, but I think the fourth option is its behavior.)","author":{"url":"https://github.com/ajnelson-nist","@type":"Person","name":"ajnelson-nist"},"datePublished":"2018-04-09T22:43:26.000Z","interactionStatistic":{"@type":"InteractionCounter","interactionType":"https://schema.org/CommentAction","userInteractionCount":1},"url":"https://github.com/2/CASE-Utility-RDFDiff/issues/2"}