متابعة النقاش من إضافة إعداد لتعطيل الارتباط التشعبي لملفات الصور الكبيرة:
أود اقتراح اكتشاف الصور بناءً على نوع MIME وليس بناءً على الامتداد.
حالة الاستخدام:
أضع رابط JPG في السطر:
أعتقد أنه سيكون من المفيد اكتشاف الصور لأغراض الـ oneboxing (التحديث إلى وسم img) ليس من الامتداد كما يُستخدم حاليًا، بل من نوع MIME.
Easy to work around though just add ?x=.jpg to the end of any URL.
https://freecannabis.com/media/dscf1924.36/full?x=.jpg
Thanks. But that doesn’t quite solve the problem. I’m already using workaround to add img tag manually. My users are not technically skilled so automatic form of hotlinking would be great.
I think it is super bad form to have images that look like HTML web pages so I would object to this being supported as it encourages super bad web hosting habits.
I agree it is bad practice of the image hoster, but you know - " be tolerant in what you accept "
And second, we already are pinging the URL, so why not use it to our benefit?
[edit]
Funny side note: I’ve just found that image hoster is using Xenforo Media Gallery paid plugin 
I’m going to disagree with you here. When you get the “Content-Type:” header, that’s when you know what you are dealing with. Otherwise a URL without an extension doesn’t look like anything, not “looks like HTML”.
This is how content negotiation on the web is supposed to work. I should be able to make a directory full of files, and return different versions of them depending on the “Accept” headers the browser offers. If you don’t explicitly say “Accept: image/x-mycoolformat”, but just a “Accept: /”, then maybe I want to hand you image/jpeg, but otherwise give you mycoolformat.
By that logic, page titles and urls also don’t matter. But we all know they do. So I violently disagree on this point.
Page titles have many uses, eg distinguishing tabs and titling bookmarks. URLs matter only because Google thinks they should. But I won’t press the point further.
