Checker investigation [was: Re: Version 1.11]

[Gunnar Hjalmarsson <mailbox@gunnar.cc>]

Pamster wrote:
> 
> In a ring of 225 sites, I think I got about 10-15 of those...
> While that's a small percentage, in a really large ring it could be
> a significant number.
Pam,
I have investigated the URL you posted last Sunday as well as a few more
URLs I got privately. The problem you reported was that the checker
reports link failures though the fragments seem to be ok. To be able to
investigate the pages, I copied the checker details to new html pages
which I uploaded on my own site. I had to change the link URLs to fit
the location of my test copy of Ringlink, but otherwise the pages are
unchanged.
These are the results of my investigation:
http://www.angelfire.com/ak/harleyangel/Rings.html
Passed
http://www.angelfire.com/journal2/angelicheart/
Passed
http://members.nbci.com/_XOOM/MCWebDesignz/page8.html
This URL loaded a frames file in my browser, while the checker reported
200 OK and grabbed a 404 Error page... I tried to use the URL
http://members.nbci.com/_XMCM/mcwebdesignz/page8.html instead, but it
didn't change the checker behaviour. It seems like the checker can't be
used to check fragments on pages hosted at XOOM, at least not for the
time being.
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Lake/5724/Webrings2.html
The list and previous links failed, which they should (misspellings:
cgi-gin and siteis).
The next link failed too, and the reason is that the link doesn't
include "www." before the domain name. In this case the link still
works, but missing "www."s are not tolerated by all servers, so I'm not
ready to make the checker let such links pass.
http://www.angelfire.com/ma2/starlightswmwebrings/index.html
Passed
If you want to study my test ring for this investigation, this is the
URL: http://www.bahnhof.se/~hjalmar/cgi-bin/ringlink/ringadmin.pl
(ringid: SGMring, password: test)
To summarize: The checker wasn't able to grab the actual HTML page
hosted at XOOM, but for the other four pages the reported results were
correct. I wasn't able to repeat any occurrence where the checker
grabbed the actual HTML page but still didn't report correct results.
So, just to be sure, I'd appreciate your clarifications:
- As for the XOOM URL, do you get the 404 error page as well, or do
  you get the actual HTML page?
- As for the other four pages, does the checker grab the actual HTML
  pages with the fragments, or does it grab anything else (like other
  404 pages...)?
/ Gunnar