Problem seeing an image with a 'googleusercontent' URL
Thread Starter
Problem seeing an image with a 'googleusercontent' URL
I cannot see the image in this post, using Safari or Firefox on a Mac, or on an iPhone, viewing either the PPRuNe regular or mobile web pages:
http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/5876...ml#post9620991
The poster assures me that she can see it. I would appreciate it if a few people could check the link and report back.
If I go into Firefox editor, I can see the code for the image:
A search confirms that there are issues with 'googleusercontent'. Does anyone here know anything about this problem?
http://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/5876...ml#post9620991
The poster assures me that she can see it. I would appreciate it if a few people could check the link and report back.
If I go into Firefox editor, I can see the code for the image:
Code:
<img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/3JYSTdywAEhudpbF-_ccPwAuhs1oGcDWMueInSS0tUmhJ0zu2kzBLmSJIApQyyIplV0CYEP8Glb4qXswEKHqa-dOrX-wzKZUxGpY=w1708-h961-rw-no#.jpg" border="0" alt="" class="post_inline_image" />
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Siliconia
Age: 63
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
SD,
Sorry. I thought I had posted a direct link. It's not the Opti post.
It's Post 17 by brockenspectre. The last sentence in the post is:
The image URL follows that sentence.
Here's a bigger code snippet:
I don't see the image on a Mac and neither does Wodrick on a Windows machine.
PS Thanks, noughtnones. I didn't see your post, when I replied to SD. Interesting, but perhaps not surprising that a Google image URL shows up properly on a Google browser!
Sorry. I thought I had posted a direct link. It's not the Opti post.
It's Post 17 by brockenspectre. The last sentence in the post is:
and now... here is where the flotilla is in the Christmas race:
Here's a bigger code snippet:
Code:
<br /> This year we buddied with the Danish round Fyn race, the Silverudder Challenge, and I know it will be happening again next year too :-)<br /> <br /> and now... here is where the flotilla is in the Christmas race:<br /> <br /> <img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/3JYSTdywAEhudpbF-_ccPwAuhs1oGcDWMueInSS0tUmhJ0zu2kzBLmSJIApQyyIplV0CYEP8Glb4qXswEKHqa-dOrX-wzKZUxGpY=w1708-h961-rw-no#.jpg" border="0" alt="" class="post_inline_image" /> </div>
PS Thanks, noughtnones. I didn't see your post, when I replied to SD. Interesting, but perhaps not surprising that a Google image URL shows up properly on a Google browser!
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: localhost
Age: 25
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting, but perhaps not surprising that a Google image URL shows up properly on a Google browser!
Given that links to a valid image, any HTTP compliant browser should have no problem with it.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many times when I hear such things it is a router or gateway blocking certain (spam-)server. Maybe there is something in the connection blocking googleusercontent.com ? I.e. my internal company provider does block relayed image links when pointing to dropbox public (now gone anyways) or google accounts. I would try browsing to a different file from there and see whether it is something like that.
Spoon PPRuNerist & Mad Inistrator
Sorry for being thick!
Your link seems to suggest the googelcontent is translating a .jpg into a .webp:
Sticking the image URL only (from your code) in to both FF and IE11 results in:
AIUI, Mozilla doesn't natively support webp, neither (it seems do IE and Safari), so the browser cannot deal with it, and when embedded in HTML as in the original post, it simply doesn't appear.
So the problem seems to be a proprietary image standard that google are using, that no-one else supports.
It looks like you would have to download the "image" and then use a 3rd-party converter to view it.
SD
Your link seems to suggest the googelcontent is translating a .jpg into a .webp:
Code:
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/3JYSTdywAEhudpbF-_ccPwAuhs1oGcDWMueInSS0tUmhJ0zu2kzBLmSJIApQyyIplV0CYEP8Glb4qXswEKHqa-dOrX-wzKZUxGpY=w1708-h961-rw-no#.jpg
Do you want to open or save Christmas2016_26Dec16.webp
So the problem seems to be a proprietary image standard that google are using, that no-one else supports.
It looks like you would have to download the "image" and then use a 3rd-party converter to view it.
SD
Thread Starter
SD,
Thanks for your research. I had tried the same trick of posting the URL and came up with the same error. I had never heard of .webp before. I'll do some more digging.
crablab,
You are right. Any HTTP compliant browser should display the image, but it doesn't! See SD's response. It is a Google specific issue.
Here's some background to the issue:
http://arstechnica.com/information-t...-webp-support/
Thanks for your research. I had tried the same trick of posting the URL and came up with the same error. I had never heard of .webp before. I'll do some more digging.
Given that links to a valid image, any HTTP compliant browser should have no problem with it.
You are right. Any HTTP compliant browser should display the image, but it doesn't! See SD's response. It is a Google specific issue.
Here's some background to the issue:
http://arstechnica.com/information-t...-webp-support/
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: localhost
Age: 25
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WebP isn't actually propitiatory at all, it's an open standard and is generally very well supported. WebM (it's sister format) is supported by "everything" except IE (which doesn't support HTML5 so that's not surprising). Although it is currently developed by Google, as I said it isn't propitiatory at all.
We make a point of supporting it in our web applications due to it's ubiquity. I am not aware of any "Google specific issues" - if anything it it is other browsers that have "specific" issues!
Spoon PPRuNerist & Mad Inistrator
Crablab,
You may be right in that google presented the standard as open. However, the fact remains that only chrome and derivative browsers seem to actually support it, and as chrome is also owned and developed by google, I believe that proprietary is an appropriate description.
You may be right in that google presented the standard as open. However, the fact remains that only chrome and derivative browsers seem to actually support it, and as chrome is also owned and developed by google, I believe that proprietary is an appropriate description.
Thread Starter
And in the Mac world:
Safari (Mac and iPhone), no
Firefox, no
Safari (Mac and iPhone), no
Firefox, no