Le fichier n’a pas l’extension JPG, mais le type de contenu (content-type) est correctement envoyé. J’aimerais donc que Discourse le convertisse automatiquement en balise img, l’affiche en ligne et autorise même le hotlinking.
Je pense qu’il serait bénéfique de détecter les photos pour le oneboxing (conversion en balise img) non pas à partir de l’extension, comme c’est le cas actuellement, mais à partir du type MIME.
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’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.
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.
