And by the way, as of the writing of this I’m not aware of any APP server implementations that get green check-marks all the way down the line from the Ape.
You can run the APE against my apptestsite:
No name or password are required. You will see that some things don't look quite right:
- 1. Content-type must be 'application/atomserv+xml', not 'application/atomsvc+xml'
- That's not true as of draft-14.
- 11. 'summary' has type='html' in entry as posted, type='xhtml' in returned entry.
- I presume the ? is just an informational message and not a warning or an error? For reference, the APP Test Client breaks messages down into three categories: Informational, Warning (breaks a SHOULD/SHOULD NOT) and Error (breaks a MUST/MUST NOT).
- 12. 'content' in entry as posted [ ... ] differs from that in returned entry [ ... ].
- The problem here is that my implementation normalizes the content and turns all chracter entities into their real characters, unless that would cause a problem. For example, the > gets turned into > as opposed to being preserved as a character entity. A little more robust string comparison would eliminate this false negative.
- 28. Can't update new entry with PUT:
Not FoundMethod not allowed Where did that URI come from?Fixed the bad URI returned on my side, but now we have a problem with conditional PUTs. I do have one bug to fix and that is the relative URI being returned in the Location: header upon a successful create.