![]() |
|
![]() |
||
![]() |
![]() |
|
[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 |
|
||||||||||||||||