Stop downloading it if the URL was loaded via, and place something like an image of the word GIF with a cross over it in the img tag. Of course you could be unlucky and try to download a file that is not a gif but which happened to start with either of those two sequences of bytes.
So as long as the file isn't served with additional compression obscuringly applied on top (gzip etc) you will have an indicator that the file might be a GIF after downloading just the six first bytes of it. It starts with one of two six byte long sequences identifying the version of the format that is being used.
GIF has a header at the start of the file identifying it as such. > if the GIF was served as image/png then it wouldn't be until the image finished downloading that the browser would learn it was a GIF Browser developers think about these things all the time and have, in some cases, decades of experience dealing with them, yet they constantly get lambasted by armchair strategists who've thought about these issues for five minutes and decided it's all easy. Web browsers are part of a complex ecosystem where seemingly straightforward actions have all kinds of unintended consequences. You may not see that as a problem, but it pushes app developers to support only native platforms - where you can't block anything. "Obnoxious ads will negatively impact a site's reputation and people's willingness to view/use it."Īnother problem with adding rate limits or other ever-increasingly complicated heuristics is that it makes the Web platform ever more difficult to deploy applications on. You'd think so, but the same argument is used to claim that blocking isn't needed at all. At some point the worsening user experience will negatively impact a site's reputation and people's willingness to view/use it.
0 kommentar(er)
