Files ALWAYS gets downloaded even if `Content-Disposition` is set to `inline`

[DenuxPlays]

This is due to the unnecessary download attribute in the tag here:

        {%- if download_uri -%}
            <a href="{{ asset_helper is same as(true) ? asset(download_uri) : download_uri }}" download>
                {{ translation_domain is same as(false) ? download_label : download_label|trans({}, translation_domain) }}
            </a>
        {%- endif -%}

It should be

        {%- if download_uri -%}
            <a href="{{ asset_helper is same as(true) ? asset(download_uri) : download_uri }}">
                {{ translation_domain is same as(false) ? download_label : download_label|trans({}, translation_domain) }}
            </a>
        {%- endif -%}

Files still get downloaded but now the Content-Disposition gets respected.

What's the case when Content-Disposition is online?

[DenuxPlays]

What's the case when Content-Disposition is online?

It simply means that the browser tries to open the file inside the browser and if he can't he is still going to download it.

I overwrote your form template and simply removed the download attribute and it works as expected (even when not setting the header/ direct download link)

[garak]

So, it seems that the default template works fine with the default headers. If you want something different, overwriting the template is enough. I don't see any issue here.

[DenuxPlays]

So, it seems that the default template works fine with the default headers. If you want something different, overwriting the template is enough.

I don't see any issue here.

My issue is that the download Attribute is unnecessary. It works as expected without it and without it the standard header gets actually respected as expected.

[garak]

You already solved it with the custom template. Is there anything else you need?

[DenuxPlays]

You already solved it with the custom template. Is there anything else you need?

I thought this change can be applied directly here. As I think this is a general improvement/"bug" fix

[garak]

The whole point is about what the average user expects to get. The current implementation suits it. A custom implementation is still possible. So, I don't see the need for improvements or fixes.

[DenuxPlays]

The current experiene does not change. The user would still get what they expected but okay if you are not open to this change this disscussion is pointless