>>>>testing : http://stackoverflow.com/questions/161738.com returns .t. even if this page dont exists.funny!
>>>>getting 404 error page (invalid Url inside a valid domain) this function returns .t. as valid url.
>>>>The API InternetGetConnectedState provides same behaviour.
>>>>maybe the DOS command "PING " can resolve this ? to test.
>>>
>>>Hi Yousfi,
>>>
>>>I think this test (even if not 100% reliable) is OK for me now. I already posted the User Story completed with that code. We'll see what the testers tell me. The validation of URL was not actually required at all, but I thought it would be nice to have.
>>
>>True validation is done by checking if it works.
>>If someone wants to enter a future URL then things get complicated.
>
>I think that test checks if the domain is OK. So, it may allow URLs that return 404 errors, but I don't think it should be a major concern for me. It will filter bad inputs such as 1243fdkjfkdjfkd.
>
>If there is no internet connection to test, then it also will be a problem. I'll let our testers to come back to me, though, in case this validation I introduced is not a good one.


1243fdkjfkdjfkd? Why not good? I saw url of all kinds.

Everything has conditions, and here the condition is that the link works.
How do you distinguish the lack of link from a site off?
If the link is interrupted to 1000 km from where you are?
The fact that it works now, does not make the fact that it works from 1 minute
If the URL respects the characters and grammar, the rest is only likely