[#2649] - J!3.2 update , <!DOCTYPE html> missing ?
- Closed
- 10 Dec 2013
- Medium
- Build: master
- # 2649
Just noticed a very strange difference in two J!3.2 test installations. One is an updated site from 3.1.x and the other is a full installation.
The visual issue is a wrong height for all standard input fields in frontend. i.e. only 20px, without any padding. Bootstrap default is much bigger by default.
I thought it might be related to the template CSS... and i tested different templates and frameworks. The input height did not change. Then I switched to the second J!3.2 installation, and the input height was back to normal, i.e. bootstrap2 default. No matter which template or framework I choose.
So, the difference is visible in the updated site only.
Coincidentally, i noticed in Firebug inspector that the DOCTYPE is missing!?
- DOCTYPE is missing in updated site only.
- Missing DOCTYPE seems to be the cause for different CSS rendering.
- The J!3.2 full installation has no issues. DOCTYPE is present!
Anyone seen this before?
Thanks in advance.
Thanks for your quick reply. Exactly my first thoughts, too.
Frankly, I really hesitated to post this issue at all… because of its strangeness ;-)
At the moment, I am clueless… but I will check this again!
As far as I recall it, it happens in J! default templates, too.
(I am currently on a different machine, stay tuned...)
Maybe also check if it's a caching issue 
BTW, i found 1! similar report by a german user. Upgrade to J!3.2 and it seems he use a commercial template based on foundation framework. The post is here, but in german: http://www.seitenreport.de/forum/beitraege/analyse_ergebnisse/komplette_fehlermeldung_nach_update_auf_joomla_32.html
German isn't an issue for me, being from german part in Switzerland 
I read the thread but didn't get much enlightment out of it.
Going forward you should open a tracker item on our issue tracker http://joomlacode.org/gf/project/joomla/tracker/?action=TrackerItemBrowse&tracker_id=8103 since we are not yet tracking issues in GitHub.
Provide testing instructions to reproduce it as best as you can. That will certainly help.
If the tracker item exists, you can reference it back here.
Just posting in here to test as per your request in the cms mailing list. Sorry about making an off topic post
You may blame the J!Tracker Application for transmitting this comment.
I've got a 3.2 site I've been working on a template for and I can see the doctype fine if I look in the source
Sorry, but I couldn't re-create this strange behavior in a new (3rd) installation. I used the same packages, extensions and templates etc.
I also tried to compare the working 3.2 full install vs. 3.1.5updated site. Disabled and moved system plugins etc. etc. No succese, no difference...
Now the funny part:
I re-installed a 3.2 FULL installation over the site with DOCTYPE issues... also re-installed K2 (because it seems to add special HTML prefix stuff in the head). Then I manually copied PROTOSTAR template to my updates site...
and the DOCTYPE is there again! :D
Please, don´t ask what was the final culprit and cause!?! I don't know.
Does that mean we can close this?
@brianteeman
Probably, yes.
(I wish I could give more details about the actual cause and solution, sorry. I will keep an eye on that test installation)
zero-24
-
Closing for now. If you have more information in the future it can always be reopened
| Title |
|
||||||
| Status | New | ⇒ | Closed | ||||
| Closed_Date | 0000-00-00 00:00:00 | ⇒ | 2013-12-10 11:12:50 | ||||
| Labels |
Added:
?
|
||||||
| Title |
|
||||||
| Labels |
Added:
?
Removed: ? |
||||||
That doesn't make much sense to me. The
<!DOCTYPE html>should be generated by the template itself, not by Joomla. See https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/blob/master/templates/beez3/index.php#L71 and https://github.com/joomla/joomla-cms/blob/master/templates/protostar/index.php#L82 for the lines in Beez and Protostar respectively.Can you check the index.php file in your template for the presence of that (or a similar) line?
I could only imagine that in the updated version, a plugin messes around with that somehow.