Last year we talked about the development of the Kontur.Elba application for Android (and more than once ). Having implemented all our plans in it, we set about developing a version for iOS , which recently appeared in the App Store. A post about development using Xamarin.Forms will be later, but for now let's focus on a seemingly trivial matter: laying out the application on the App Store and talking to moderators.

Let's start with the conclusions that we got in the process of communicating with the Apple moderators:

• the App Store Review Guidelines should be carefully re-read: recommendations change, and what was allowed yesterday could be banned today;
• Apple moderators do not always carefully study the application and may miss content inside;
• you need to carefully read the responses of moderators;
• the solution after verification may not comply with the rules of the App Store. An example in the text below: the requirement to connect in app purchase for an application without the support of paid features;
• in incomprehensible situations it is better to immediately write an appeal in order not to spend a week waiting for an answer. If the answer is not satisfactory or incomprehensible - new appeals;
• moderation can take a long time: at least 8 days, of which 7 days - waiting in line for checking.

We present a log of communication with moderators with unexpected turns, investigations, total misunderstanding, but with a happy conclusion of the storyline.

June 11

Application development is complete, it remains to fix some bugs. We deliberately sent to appruv version 0.9 , which we were not going to show to users in order to first work out the moderation procedure and find out about inconsistencies with the guidelines. Themselves at that time engaged in the correction of errors.
')

22nd of June

The application has moved from the “Waiting for validation” status to the “Verified” status.

June 23

The status changed to “Required information”, and a letter was received from technical support. The most amazing questions and our answers:

Q: Who is the target audience of the application?
A: Small business of the Russian Federation. The application allows you to create and print documents, as well as send them to counterparties.
Note: The application description already contains this information.

Q: Is this an existing service? And if so, where is it available?
A: Yes, existing service. It is available at e-kontur.ru . The application has a link to it.
Note: The question was probably asked without launching the application and reading its description, since The link to the web service is contained inside and outside.

Q: Is the application an integral part of the service or can the service work without an application?
A: A service can work without an application, while an application can work limitedly without service and without the Internet at all: you can create documents without sending and viewing a print form.

The following questions and answers related to the payment scheme, for example:

Q: How does the user / company pay? By subscription or one time? What is the price, and how can I pay?
A: The application can be used without payment - full functionality is available after registration within the application. Without registration, you can create a maximum of 5 documents. The service has paid options, but only for the user of the web version.

Q: Is it possible to buy paid upgrades for an application outside the application?
A: No.

All of these (and subsequent, see the original) questions are rather standardized, so it’s not clear why not put them in the application description, the questionnaire before being sent to moderation so as not to slow down the process?

We give the original letter and our answers in English under the spoiler. I had to reformat the correspondence, because after sending our answers look very unpleasant: for some reason, line breaks have disappeared. The example in the screenshot:

30 June

Application in the status "Ready for sale." Total first approval took 19 days . It was not difficult, although the sample questions / answers were somewhat upset. But as you remember, we sent a beta version. So finish the release and go!

the 14 th of July

Sent to appruv version 1.0 , start a new countdown. This version is not functionally different from the previous one, just finished the bugs. Nothing foreshadowed trouble ...

21 July

The application has moved from the “Waiting for validation” status to the “Verified” status.

July 22

The application moved to the status “Rejected”, which was unexpected for us. The essence of the letter:

1. The description of the application contains a link to "external mechanisms for the purchase or subscription."
2. The application has a registration function, which is considered an external mechanism for accessing paid purchases / subscriptions for an application.

On the same day, we replied that the application has a link to our website, but a subscription to the service does not affect the functionality of the application. And this is true: in the web service in free mode you can create no more than 5 documents, and in the application there is no such restriction. And this is not a bug, but a bonus for users of the mobile version :)

But as you can see from our answer, we missed the registration question. Our flaw, which was definitely worth the extra time ...

August 3

We get an answer without changing status. A brief retelling: “we noticed that the description of the application still contains a link to the external purchase or subscription mechanism, www.e-kontur.ru . Please remove this link. ”

Here you should pay attention to an interesting point: we are talking only about the link in the description. About the registration is not a word.

In order not to continue one-way correspondence, we removed the link from the description and sent it for moderation.

August 10

The application has moved from the “Waiting for validation” status to the “Verified” status.

11th August

The application again switched to the status “Rejected”.
The essence of the answer: thanks for removing the link from the application description. However:

1. We cannot test your application, because it requires a login / password, and you have not provided them.
2. You have an external registration / purchase mechanism in your application.
3. Also in your application there is a possibility of registration, which also falls under the definition of “external registration / purchase mechanism”.

Despite the comments about the lack of purchases for the application, which we wrote earlier, registration again served as a reason for refusal. In addition, I was surprised by the remark about the lack of data for testing, because the interface contains an explanation:

We sent an appeal through a special form: developer.apple.com/contact/app-store/?topic=expedite. And just in case, we added test login and password in the appropriate fields.

12th of August

The answer to the appeal came quickly enough, the very next evening.

Its essence is as follows: if something is bought on the site, even if it is not related to the application, such links cannot be put in the application. Well, apparently it remains only to accept and remove the link.

August 13

They removed the only link (see the screenshot, was / became), sent for moderation.

August 18

The application has moved from the “Waiting for validation” status to the “Verified” status.

August 19

The application has moved to the status "Rejected".

The reasons:

1. It is necessary to remove all links leading to the FAQ, to the support service and to the site where you can buy something.
2. The application has a registration, which is a link to the external payment mechanism.

The first part of the message is clear, but we have already removed the links from the application. Probably the moderators did not check whether we fulfilled the requirements this time or not.

For links to the site, you can take clickable labels like "More about Elbe", but they do not lead to the site, but to a page inside the application itself:


A misunderstanding occurred with the remark about the link to the external payment mechanism. There is a registration in the application, but it does not lead to an external site: it’s just an opportunity to register or log in to synchronize documents through a third-party service to another phone / tablet. Rechecking that free registration is not prohibited by the rules, we again wrote an appeal.

August 22

Apple’s response: “Thanks for the reply, please remove the registration or implement in app purchase”.


The misunderstanding did not end there: with it in in purchase, if the application does not have paid features. To understand why you need in app purchase for free registration, we asked a question.

25-th of August

Apple responds, "Yes, you must do what we said to comply with the rules."


We send our previous answer again, but not as a question, but as an appeal. Nothing changes in the text.

August, 26th

In response, we received "We will think."

August 27

The application without comment from the moderators goes to the status of "Waiting for release by the developer", which means - you can be released. We did it the same day, starting a soft launch application. Hooray!

So this is a story that is almost a month and a half long. Conclusions were made at the beginning of the article.

Of the 43 days, a third of the term went to the last stage of communication with the moderators - the requirements to include in app purchase in the application without purchases.

Afterword

The next update of the application with bug fixes and minor features was sent for moderation on September 17th. Exactly 7 days it was “waiting for verification”, 1 day was checked, and, finally, on September 25, the update saw the light. We still do not know what difficulties with checking the application lurk in the future :)

If you have your own correspondence stories with moderators on controversial topics, tips or questions, we will be happy to discuss them in the comments to the article.