Welcome to WebHeadStart.org

Web Technologies

Sponsored By

WebHeadStart.org is currently in beta.
Please pardon our appearance as we work to provide you with the most comprehensive reference on today's web technologies.

Interested in advertising on WebHeadStart? Become an advertising partner today!

[WWW-HTML Mailing List Archive Home] [Messages By Thread] [Messages By Date]

Re: favicon.ico vs <link> - add link type for shortcut icon?

From: Arthur Wiebe <webmaster@awiebe.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 16:20:44 -0400
Message-ID: <3EFCA71B.8060301@awiebe.com>
To: Robin Lionheart <w3c-ml@robinlionheart.com>, www-html@w3.org

Robin Lionheart wrote:

>Brian Bober wrote:
>:: This is obviously an old issue, but couldn't we add
>:: "shortcut icon" or just "icon" and "shorcut" meaning the same thing (and
>:: working if placed together) into
>:: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/types.html#type-links ?
>
>rel="shortcut icon" defines two relationships, 'shortcut' and 'icon'.
>
>A definition of rel="icon" would suffice.
>
>rel="shortcut" isn't an appropriate relationship between a document and an
>icon, since "shortcut" is IE's synonym for "bookmark". Better to leave
>"shortcut" undefined and ignored.
>
>
>
>  
>
rel="icon" should be added to the spec. It is already supported by 
Mozilla, I don't know if IE supports it or not.
<Arthur/>
Received on Friday, 27 June 2003 18:37:49 GMT
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | WebHeadStart.org © 2005 All Rights Reserved.