1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Fixed Unicode Category Section Anchor Issue

Discussion in 'Resolved Bug Reports' started by ibnesayeed, Nov 9, 2011.

  1. ibnesayeed

    ibnesayeed Well-Known Member

    On the forum/node listing page, all the categories have got section anchors (href="#category-title"). Expected behavior on clicking those links is to scroll the page enough to bring that section at the top of visible region.

    It seems like for non-ASCII characters, it is using some character replacement/key map technique to dynamically create its ASCII equivalent. And failure to find a key map, leads to URL encoded character equivalent. In such cases where not all characters have got key map equivalents, expected behavior is not seen on Firefox. Although, it works on Google Chrome.
  2. Mike

    Mike XenForo Developer Staff Member

    Have an example? We actually do romanization and deaccenting on these IDs for this reason. I can only imagine that the romanization can't be done so it's leaving the characters. (Changed it to strip the extra stuff out.)
    ibnesayeed likes this.
  3. ibnesayeed

    ibnesayeed Well-Known Member

    Is there a table where we can add more characters to be used for romanization (or key mapping)? This kind of per character mapping is not actual romanaization for most of the languages though. Hence, it will be nice to have an extra field in category table to have optional roman equivalent specified manually. That might have better SEO impact. Current fix of stripping extra stuff is lossy and may cause more than one section anchors with the same name.

    I will send you a link to our test xF 1.1b4 installation in PC.
  4. Mike

    Mike XenForo Developer Staff Member

    Romanization is provided by the UTF-8 library we include.

    Anchors will not be the same because of the category ID being included.
    ibnesayeed likes this.
  5. ibnesayeed

    ibnesayeed Well-Known Member

    How did I miss that fact. :)

    By the way, please consider the optional field I had suggested in last post. :)

Share This Page