On Jan 24, 12:03 pm, ff <[email protected]> wrote: > That's the thing. Is there a definition of web browser without any > possible doubts? I can name most of the well known web browsers, but > not *all* web browsers. For example a mobile application written with > j2me which has basic xhtml 1.0 rendering capabilities and that lets > users enter and follow any displayed link is considered a web browser?
Like Opera Mini? If Mosaic was a web browser (remember that?) then Opera Mini is. Mosaic couldn't even handle tables. > Again the mobile problem. If I understand well this limit makes static > maps unusable in most mobile applications also when displayed with a > web browser: > - the requesting IP is usually not the device (natted) but the APN of > the mobile operator > - server side rendering browsers like opera mini reach soon the limit Does Opera Mini soon reach the limit? Well-behaved proxies use the X_FORWARDED_FOR header which allows differentiation of requests coming through a proxy: but Google need to know that the main IP address is that of a proxy and approve it in order that the NAT address is used for counting. Most mobile operators already use a proxy, so X_FORWARDED_FOR could have more than one entry. However, "approve it" may not be a formal process -- Google could simply identify a proxy as a mobile operator (or Opera's server) and whitelist it. They may not identify your proxy as one they should whitelist. And all of this is conjecture as Google [quite reasonably] don't publish their limiting algorithms. You may need to start with a beta service and see what happens in your case. Andrew --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Maps API" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Maps-API?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
