W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > January 2003

Re: comments on 2002-12-12 XHTML 2.0 WD

From: Mikko Rantalainen <mira@cc.jyu.fi>
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 2003 23:07:41 +0200
Message-ID: <3E13589D.7080803@cc.jyu.fi>
To: Alexander Savenkov <w3@hotbox.ru>
CC: www-html@w3.org

Alexander Savenkov wrote:
> 2002-12-18T22:26:31Z Tim wrote:
>>At 2002-12-18T16:54+0200, Mikko Rantalainen wrote:-
>>>Daniel Glazman wrote:
> 
>>>>9. Link types should allow "icon" for rel/rev. That's proposed by
> 
>>>I'm not sure how aural browsers should render the icon but I think we
>>>need to provide similar support for those too.
> 
>>The site designer could choose to provide another icon of audio/* type; an
>>aural browser might render such icons when presenting a list of pages to
[...]
>>It is however not entirely clear to me that icons do not belong in style
>>sheets - they are, after all, essentially entirely presentational. On the
> 
> Have a look at http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-css3-ui-20020802#box-model.
> According to the draft there's no need in "icon" value for <link>'s
> 'rel' attribute.

If I understood that correctly, the proposed icon display is meant for 
stuff like icons for a specific element -- for example, for a paragraph. 
The spec could have been a bit more specific about what the result 
should be; I guess icon could be displayed in the paragraph margin.

I still think we need a standard way to specify icons for whole pages 
and/or sites. I vote for multiple <link rel="icon" 
href="url-to-icon.ext" />'s as there're already browsers supporting that.

-- 
Mikko
Received on Wednesday, 1 January 2003 16:07:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:53 GMT