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

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:55 GMT