Make it possible to disable favicon using "serverside" http headers. … #5
Conversation
…Typically done via checkbox and page controller.
|
Until I get this, my plan for a workaround is to run another response filter after the favicon filter and strip away the correct lines from res.pageContributions.headEnd. Not very pretty, but it should work. Hmm or I could simply compile and upload my version of the app to our Enonic XP installations. |
|
Hi there! I don't quite understand the general use case here - do you want to remove the favicon if you're setting a header in the response from the server before this filter runs? Why? |
| return res; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if(res.headers && res.headers.serverSideDisableFavicon) { | ||
| delete res.headers.serverSideDisableFavicon; // Strip serverSide data so the end user never receives them. | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The only way this code will ever run is if the imageId is not set (if you haven't uploaded an image yet).
If an image IS uploaded, the serverSideDisableFavicon header will be sent to the client after all (since it will return on line 8/11). You would either need to delete the header there as well, or do something like this:
var disableFavicon = res.headers && res.headers.serverSideDisableFavicon;
delete res.headers.serverSideDisableFavicon;
if (!imageId || disableFavicon) {
return res;
}
var view = ..... // rest of code.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes you are absolutely correct about that.
|
On some pages I want to disable the favicon. The only way I know of to pass "data" from a page controller to a filter is via the response header. |
|
Ah, I get your use case. Is it really an issue though? Most pages included within iframes don't strip their favicons (if any) - and they'll just be ignored by the browser. I made a quick codepen to check, and it looks like the browser doesn't download them at all. Therefore, the only upside is saving about 500b of HTML - a pretty negligible amount. Measure that up with the complexity that goes with adding a header and then removing it again - a bug prone procedure in itself. Thoughts? |
|
I agree. If Enonic decides to add some kind of server-side pass along data structure that would be better. The only reason I "needed" to do it was a a third party that denied support because there was extra headers they did not specify. Nuff said... |
|
Ah getcha. Well, if you need to remove headers, you can simply create a new filter that removes any of your custom headers before sending the response. |
|
do you want me to close this pull request, or do you still want me to consider it? |
|
This looks closable since the problem it solved (extra server request) wasn't a problem in reality (found out with the testing @selbekk did. |
…Typically done via checkbox and page controller.
@selbekk