Noobc0re Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 If you go to omsamer.se/gielain you'll see a site that looks messed up with a lot asian characters. Can't tell if it is japanese, chinese or from somewhere else, that is probably not even relevant. If run from the folders on my computer, this site looks normal, so why does it mess up so bad online? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 That's what the file actually has in it, or at least that's what the server is responding with. There are a few 404 and 403 errors that I see in the network tab in Chrome's developer tools. This is what the server is returning, if it shows up here: <!DOCTYPE html4>㰀栀琀洀氀㸀<head>㰀琀椀琀氀攀㸀䜀椀攀氀愀椀渀㰀⼀琀椀琀氀攀㸀<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="css/index.css">㰀⼀栀攀愀搀㸀<Body>㰀搀椀瘀 椀搀㴀攀渀瘀攀氀漀瀀㸀<div id=headerbox>ऀऀ㰀椀洀最 猀爀挀㴀∀瀀椀挀⼀栀攀愀搀攀爀⸀瀀渀最∀ 愀氀琀㴀∀栀攀愀搀攀爀∀㸀</div>ऀ㰀搀椀瘀 椀搀㴀洀攀渀礀戀漀砀㸀 <ul class="meny">ऀऀऀऀ㰀氀椀㸀㰀愀 栀爀攀昀㴀∀椀渀搀攀砀⸀栀琀洀氀∀ 挀氀愀猀猀㴀∀戀∀㸀㰀⼀愀㸀㰀⼀氀椀㸀 <li><a href="omoss.html" class="b2"></a></li>ऀऀऀऀ㰀氀椀㸀㰀愀 栀爀攀昀㴀∀漀瘀攀爀猀愀琀琀渀椀渀最⸀栀琀洀氀∀ 挀氀愀猀猀㴀∀戀㌀∀㸀㰀⼀愀㸀㰀⼀氀椀㸀 <li><a href="tolkning.html" class="b4"></a></li>ऀऀऀऀ㰀氀椀㸀㰀愀 栀爀攀昀㴀∀欀漀渀琀愀欀琀⸀栀琀洀氀∀ 挀氀愀猀猀㴀∀戀㔀∀㸀㰀⼀愀㸀㰀⼀氀椀㸀 </ul>ऀ㰀⼀搀椀瘀㸀<div id=textbox>ऀऀ㰀椀洀最 猀爀挀㴀∀瀀椀挀⼀匀甀漀爀瘀愀开昀攀戀 㠀ⴀ㈀㐀㤀开 ⸀樀瀀最∀ 愀氀琀㴀∀猀漀甀爀瘀愀∀㸀㰀戀爀㸀 <div class="t1">ऀऀऀ㰀栀㸀䨀漀爀最愀氀攀愀瀀洀椀 樀愀 搀甀氀欀漀渀 㰀⼀栀㸀 <p>Jorgalan davvisámegiela ja ruoŧagiela gaskkas muhto maid iežá gielaide go mus lea ovttasbargu iežá jorgaleddjiiguin.㰀戀爀㸀Lean auktoriserejuvvon dulka davvisámegiela ja ruoŧagiela gaskkas Ruoŧas. Lean maid hárjanan dulkot dárogielas ja eaŋgalasgillii/eaŋgalasgielas.</p>ऀऀ㰀⼀搀椀瘀㸀 <div class="t2">ऀऀऀ㰀栀㸀혀瘀攀爀猀琀琀渀椀渀最 漀挀栀 琀漀氀欀渀椀渀最㰀⼀栀㸀 <p>Översättningar till och från nordsamiska och svenska men även till ett antal andra språk.Auktoriserad tolk i nordsamiska - svenska, men har även erfarenhet av att tolka från norska och engelska.</p>ऀऀ㰀⼀搀椀瘀㸀</div>ऀ㰀搀椀瘀 椀搀㴀戀漀琀戀漀砀㸀 <img src="pic/bot.png" alt="bot">ऀ㰀⼀搀椀瘀㸀</div>㰀⼀戀漀搀礀㸀</html> You've got an invalid doctype and head and body sections which don't close. Other than errors with your HTML that you should validate and fix, you might not be uploading the files correctly. You should be uploading them as binary files, not ASCII files. That page also triggered a block on our firewall, where the rule that triggered it said that the response contained a Unicode charset that failed to normalize. I didn't look up that error message to see what that means. Sounds like it thinks you have multiple types of Unicode there, which sounds like an encoding error, which could happen if you have the wrong FTP options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingolme Posted March 13, 2013 Share Posted March 13, 2013 It looks like your web host is doing this. Maybe it's some form of advertising. By the way, <!DOCTYPE html4> is an invalid doctype declaration and will make the page run in quirks mode.For a list of proper HTML doctypes, check Common DOCTYPE Declarations here: http://w3schools.com/tags/tag_doctype.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noobc0re Posted March 14, 2013 Author Share Posted March 14, 2013 It looks like your web host is doing this. Maybe it's some form of advertising. By the way, <!DOCTYPE html4> is an invalid doctype declaration and will make the page run in quirks mode.For a list of proper HTML doctypes, check Common DOCTYPE Declarations here: http://w3schools.com...tag_doctype.asp I know it is, but it was the only one that worked properly for all three(chrome, firefox and IE) browsers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 Works properly? It doesn't do anything except put the browsers in quirks mode. If you want the browsers in quirks mode then leave the doctype out altogether instead of using one that doesn't exist, that way people will just assume that you want each browser to behave a little differently instead of assuming that you don't know what doctypes are. Or, use a valid doctype like the one for HTML5 and get the browsers to behave the same way, then build valid markup for all of them to use the same way. It seems like you've decided that the best solution is to give the browsers invalid markup with an invalid doctype, and claim that it works properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noobc0re Posted March 14, 2013 Author Share Posted March 14, 2013 I don't care if my doctype is a fluffy bunny as long as it performs as I want it to. My problem is getting rid of the chinese letters, and not that html4 is not a valid doctype. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noobc0re Posted March 14, 2013 Author Share Posted March 14, 2013 This is resolved now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted March 14, 2013 Share Posted March 14, 2013 I don't care if my doctype is a fluffy bunny as long as it performs as I want it to.Well, don't just say it, go all out: <!doctype fluffy bunny> Or maybe this will work: <!doctype lol whatever> Or perhaps this: <!doctype what does this do> All three of those will have exactly the same effect that your existing doctype tag has - i.e., no effect whatsoever. It does not "work", in fact it does not do anything at all. It might as well not be there, the browser would behave in exactly the same way. My problem is getting rid of the chinese letters, and not that html4 is not a valid doctype.Well, how would you know if whatever given problem you're trying to solve is related to the doctype or not? This was obviously an encoding error, but a valid doctype will fix several issues with several browsers. My point is that, if you're trying to solve problems, then it makes sense to make a valid page in the first place. It's pretty difficult to solve a problem on a page that is not valid to begin with. More importantly, in the sense of being a web developer, doesn't it make more sense to make a valid page where you know that it works the same in every browser versus making a page where you know that every browser might treat it differently? Why is that something you want to happen? If you don't want to learn how to be a web developer then no one is going to force you to do anything, but it sounds like you're making things more difficult for yourself than they have to be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noobc0re Posted March 16, 2013 Author Share Posted March 16, 2013 All three of those will have exactly the same effect that your existing doctype tag has - i.e., no effect whatsoever. It does not "work", in fact it does not do anything at all. It might as well not be there, the browser would behave in exactly the same way. Half right, all I need is for there to be a doctype declaration. If there is none, it does not work properly. But with one, it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingolme Posted March 16, 2013 Share Posted March 16, 2013 As far as my years of experience go, a wrong doctype renders exactly the same as no doctype in all browsers. There are only two rendering modes: standards compliant mode if a correct doctype is used, quirks mode in any other case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 And even if there is a valid doctype, if any characters come before it (even a BOM I think) then it throws IE into quirks mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 It does look like IE is using standards mode on your site though, even though the doctype isn't valid. That's the first I've seen that, but IE9 claims that it is using standard mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingolme Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 Perhaps Internet Explorer now runs in standards mode as long as <!DOCTYPE anyRootElement> is there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 From what I saw on MSDN, it looks like any unknown doctype will put it into standards mode. That's good as far as forward-compatibility goes, but it seems like a departure from past versions. Without a doctype, it looks like IE runs in the previous version mode. Pulling up a page without a doctype in IE6 will cause it to behave like IE5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingolme Posted March 19, 2013 Share Posted March 19, 2013 Given this, a bad doctype will still cause inconsistencies between Internet Explorer and other browsers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now