Give the `VALIDATION` block its own documentation page about mapserver-documentation

[havatv]

Seems sensible to create a new page for validation. I have created mapfile/validation.txt by reusing some of the things that was already in documentation. The page has not been referenced from other pages yet - we can do that when the page is ready for "publishing". @homme , please feel free to update the new validation page.

[homme]

Thanks @havatv: I'll look at adding another section to the new page which lists existing 'reserved' keys that have special meaning for mapserver e.g. immutable.

[havatv]

MapServer/MapServer#3599 is related.

[geographika]

@havatv - is there any reason why the validation page can't be added to the main docs? I was thinking of making a new page for SCALETOKEN also, but not sure if there are conventions on which blocks merit a new page.

[havatv]

No reason apart from me being unsure that it is ready for publication. If @sdlime and @jmckenna could have a look at it and they agree that it is ready for publication, we can add it to the web site.

[havatv]

I just tried to find the validation.txt file, but it is not in the mapfile directory. The file can be reconstructed from the commit, but I will wait until we get a response.

[sdlime]

@havatv, sorry but what file should I be reviewing? --Steve

[havatv]

@sdlime, the file is gone, but you will find the contents in the commit (3b8e0da).

[geographika]

Built page at: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/29280207/mapserver/mapfile/validation.html

[sdlime]

I think the page looks great - the topic certainly warrants the detailed discussion. Two questions:

1. There is a lot of overlap with the run-time substitution page. Perhaps that page could be more tactical, that is, addressing strategies and use cases with the syntax being in the validation block.
2. There is a use case not covered in the docs that could (should?) be - setting validation for CGI-based mapfile changes (http://mapserver.org/cgi/controls.html#changing-map-file-parameters-via-a-form-or-a-url). At worst we should reference that content.

Steve

[havatv]

OK. I will give it a go.

[havatv]

In the latest commit I added the file and linked it into the documentation. I have not yet adressed @sdlime's two questions yet.

[havatv]

The validation block now has its own documentation page, and I have added issues for @sdlime's two questions. Closing.