[Bug 922] Wrong content-type detected with broken HTTP server

http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=922





------- Additional Comments From nunoanjos@yahoo.com  2004-10-21 11:35 -------
Since you are re-opening the bug, and I am also curious about this issue, I can
provide you with more (and new) information.

By the time I started this bug, 2004-10-20 01:17, I was getting the error
message with a yellow background. From that message, the possible explanation is:

"That you recieved this message can mean that your server is not configured
correctly, that your file does not have the correct filename extension, or that
you are attempting to validate a file type that we do not support yet."

>From these 3 options, I think the last one (file type not yet supported) was
never valid for this case, so that leaves the first 2 possible.

And the last option was never possible, because I validated PHP pages before,
and it worked ok. What is validated is the HTML code generated by the PHP
scripts, along with the static HTML code.

This also explains the second option, the file not having a correct filename
extension. I validated PHP files before, so this is not possible.

Therefore, I think that only "your server is not configured correctly" could be
the correct explanation.

Between 2004-10-20 12:48 and 2004-10-20 20:42, I tried to validate the site
again a few times. And, once, I got a new error. I didn't copy the text, or took
a screenshot for example, but from what I can remember, it looked more or less
like this:

Error 500: Bad chunk-size in HTTP response: <line number (I don't remember which)>

Some hours later, shortly before my 2004-10-20 20:42 conclusion, I tried the
validation again, and, to my surprise, the validation is normal again, and all
my pages validate without errors (meaning W3C compliance)...

Some days ago, I couldn't even have access to my pages, there are news on my web
hosting provider site, http://www.100webspace.com/, about "DDoS attacks towards
everywebhost.com and mybesthost.com". The server is new, and they must be
configuring it. So, this could be the best cause for the bug firstly reported.
Thank you, Olivier, for your interest.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

Received on Thursday, 21 October 2004 11:36:10 UTC