W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > April 2008

[whatwg] <link rel=icon width="" height="">

From: Martin Atkins <mart@degeneration.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:42:52 +0100
Message-ID: <4818AF9C.80407@degeneration.co.uk>
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
> Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:
>> <link rel="enclosure" type="image/xxx" width="640" height="480"
>> compressioning="lossy" coloring="truecolor" href="A.xxx">
>> <link rel="enclosure" type="image/xxx" width="1280" height="960"
>> compressioning="lossy" coloring="truecolor" href="A.xxx">
>> <link rel="enclosure" type="image/xxx" width="2560" height="1920"
>> compressioning="lossy" coloring="truecolor" href="A.xxx">
>> ... could become...
>> <link rel="enclosure" type="image/xxx" metadata="size:640x480, 1280x960,
>> 2560x1920; compressioning:lossy; coloring:truecolor;" href="A.xxx">
> For color, you are reinventing Media Queries. For compression, you are 
> basically reinventing q values for MIME types.
> <link type="image/png;q=1.0" media="all and (min-color:8)">
> <link type="image/jpeg;q=0.8" media="all and (min-color:8)">

Could this be said about size as well?

<link type="image/png"
       media="all and (max-width:16px and max-height:16px)">

Here I'm assuming that "the rendering surface of the output device" as 
referred to by Media Queries[1] section 5.1 is the rectangle of pixels 
that the icon is going to be rendered within, which I suppose is a 
slight deviation from the meaning when rel="stylesheet", but I find it 
to be intuitive.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/CR-css3-mediaqueries-20070606
Received on Wednesday, 30 April 2008 10:42:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:02 UTC