Item1416: TOC anchor links broken
Priority: Normal
Current State: Closed
Released In: 1.0.5
Target Release: patch
Applies To: Engine
Component:
Branches:
Duplicate: see Tasks.Item817
TOC
anchors are,
- using
%2520
instead of _
(screenshot 1)
- does not link properly when, I think, name is too long (compare screenshot 1 and screenshot 3)
What works,
- other anchor links works just fine even though the uri has
%2520
(screenshot 2)
I've also tested on utf-8 characters. it works fine, though it turns into garble eg
StyleTests#%25e8%25b4%25b1
It has been tested on
trunk,
1.0.0, and
a standard (Lavr's) 1.0.4 installation.
None of the above systems have the same problem as I do.
Am running on UTF-8 enabled 1.0.4. What I have tested so far...
- Disabled all plugins, except the ones shipped.
- Default to
{Site}{Locale} = 'en_US.ISO-8859-1';
- Default to
{Site}{CharSet} = 'iso-8859-1';
- Cleared cache server and client
Any clues on what I'm missing here? It works perfectly fine for other systems but not mine? UTF-8 problem?
I'm facing this problem as well. I use pt_BR.utf8 as locale and utf-8 as charset.
--
GilmarSantosJr - 04 Apr 2009
Hm, just spotted an error in my report. I meant I also tried defaulting the
CharSet
to original.
Also, FWIW
$ locale -a
C
en_GB.utf8
POSIX
$ locale
LANG=en_GB.UTF-8
LC_CTYPE=en_GB.UTF8
LC_NUMERIC="en_GB.UTF-8"
LC_TIME="en_GB.UTF-8"
LC_COLLATE="en_GB.UTF-8"
LC_MONETARY="en_GB.UTF-8"
LC_MESSAGES="en_GB.UTF-8"
LC_PAPER="en_GB.UTF-8"
LC_NAME="en_GB.UTF-8"
LC_ADDRESS="en_GB.UTF-8"
LC_TELEPHONE="en_GB.UTF-8"
LC_MEASUREMENT="en_GB.UTF-8"
LC_IDENTIFICATION="en_GB.UTF-8"
LC_ALL=
I
didn't try to change the locale back to ISO-8859-1.
See
Item817 for a more detailed analysis. There you can also find the links to
Item1096 and
Item5689.
--
ChristianLudwig - 04 Apr 2009
I believe this is fixed on trunk, via
Item1448
--
CrawfordCurrie - 15 Apr 2009
As far as I can tell the anchors now also work in 1.0.5 with pure UTF8. What happend is that the TOC is purely generated by the code that prevents to TOC anchors to be the same. But the result is none the less a working TOC
--
KennethLavrsen - 26 Apr 2009