On Nov 23, 2015, at 3:35 PM, Guido Sautter <sautter@ipd.uka.de> wrote:
Hi Jorrit,

Thanks for your reply.
welcome as can be.

Thanks for confirming that there’s an character conversion issue happening somewhere.

Since the mangled characters appear in both html and json provided by GBIF, I’d say it is probably a gbif issue.

Well, what we can say at this point is that GBIF _has_ mangled characters ... which doesn't mean the mangling necessarily happened at their facilities.

Is there a way to find out whether the invalid character handling occurs in a data provider or within GBIF itself?

Sorry to say, no. That's why I stated that characters got mangled "at some point". All we can say is that it happened upstream from GBIF's API.

Best,
Guido
On Nov 23, 2015, at 3:14 PM, Guido Sautter <sautter@ipd.uka.de> wrote:
That usually happens when, at some point, UTF-8 encoded text is read as ANSI. It only happens if the text contains characters above 127 (0x79), however.

Hope that helps,
Guido
Hey y’all:

I am noticing some funny characters (e.g. "WintergrÃ¼n”) for species available here:

http://www.gbif.org/species/2882753/vernaculars

Same is observed using the api:

http://api.gbif.org/v1/species/2882753/vernacularNames

I am assuming that the actual common name should be something like “Wintergrün”.

While I was looking into this, I also noticed that no characterset is specified in http response headers.

Please confirm that this is expected behavior.

thx,

-jorrit
_______________________________________________
API-users mailing list
API-users@lists.gbif.org
http://lists.gbif.org/mailman/listinfo/api-users
_______________________________________________
API-users mailing list
API-users@lists.gbif.org
http://lists.gbif.org/mailman/listinfo/api-users