Open Hans5958 opened 3 years ago
We modified the script slightly from Plausible's original so that adblockers don't think we're doing CNAME cloaking, which in turn will result in more accurate analytics data.
There is a specific change? You should tell me earlier!
I actually updated it to include the exclusion
module, so you should take a look with the new one. I thought it's just the same thing based on the API, just with a formatting. (Please do not format, it is useless since the code is already abstracted for size optimization)
Only change is /event
→ /plausibleevent
and /error
→ /plausibleerror
I see. The weird thing is that the traffic seemed unchanged after my change, so....
On an unrelated note, and this might untrue since I have no idea how it works, I don't think being that intrusive is a nice move....
This is first party (and public) "tracking" after all, so you can't expect blockers to block that... I meant CNAME cloaking instead of CNAME flattening, btw. Took the term from Brave's blog
Forgot to address this, but not sure why we have the Plausible script from analytics.scratchaddons.com. https://analytics.scratchaddons.com/js/plausible.outbound-links.exclusions.js works fine for me. Is there a specific reason? First-party vs third-party stuff? Or what?
cc @WorldLanguages