As mentioned in #4790 (comment), to catch things like WAF blocking requests we'd need to send actual HTML markup here. Could be as simple as calling getStoryMarkup() on a stub story and sending that markup in the POST request.

And since web-stories/v1/status-check supports all request methods, we can probably even send two requests, one GET and one POST.

I think we can add this later. It is the basics on this feature, we can improve later.

Changing this to generate real markup as meant that I had to move this lower in app tree. Meaning it is running more often and we have to wait for this pieces of state to be setup. Instead of dong this, should we just mock a html string?

Makes sense. Can you ideally use getStoryMarkup() on a mock story object? No need to get story from state.

Something simple like this should be enough:

getStoryMarkup(
  {
    title: 'Status Check'
    link: 'https://example.com/',
  },
  [],
  {
    publisher: {}
  }
);

But your point above, is that we need to send real data here. Is a mock object good enough here?

A mock object is good enough.

getStoryMarkup() gets us good enough real data, a full HTML document.

I now mock the story data. We cab improve this later.

I don't think we need this validation callback.

If anything, the status_check method above could return the sent content or a hash of it

This validates that the string submitted is HTML. This is test for firewalls that are removing html that is submitted. I can remove this check, but I think we need to check the values submitted to the api at PHP level, otherwise what is the point of submitting them?

I don't love these, but they will do for now.

@swissspidy As mentioned in sprint planning, these are the mock tests that test for nothing for now. Mocking console.log didn't make a lot of sense here. We can fix these tests when this feature is finally implemented.