- From: Brian Bober <netdemonz@yahoo.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 13:32:19 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Chris Moschini <Chris.Moschini@amdocs.com>, "'Jens Meiert'" <jens.meiert@erde3.com>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org, www-style@w3.org
When I really think about it, I have to agree wholeheartedly it should be in CSS and not in <link>. This could be put in the CSS standard, and if browsers also want to support the <link> method proprietarily for people used to it, that's their choice. There are a lot more advantages for putting it in CSS. Another one that wasn't mentioned is that you could change the icon dynamically on a fully loaded page (hopefully not being abused to create animated icons). --- Chris Moschini <Chris.Moschini@amdocs.com> wrote: > Well, on one hand, I do like that title attribute. It's sensible relative to > the meaning of the tag. However, I feel the icon makes sense in CSS because: > > 1) It *is* strictly presentation; the icon has no "content," no added meaning > to the user. It simply offers a branding opportunity. Images meanwhile *can* > have content, and therefore may or may not make sense to be called from CSS. > > 2) Including it in CSS would resolve the issue of having to include a link > rel="icon" tag on every page on a site. The CSS reference would resolve it as > any site-wide CSS would reference the icon. Alternately, section-wide CSS may > reference the icon, meaning different sections of a site could have different > icons (useful and sensible). > > All "favicon" purpose does seem to point to CSS's intent... . > > -Chris "SoopahMan" Moschini > http://hiveminds.info/ > http://soopahman.com/ > > (ignore attachment) > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jens Meiert [mailto:jens.meiert@erde3.com] > > > perhaps reference to > > "favicon" belongs in a site's CSS instead > > Why!? Otherwise please be consequent and stop all the object element > discussion and simply put all images into your CSS...! > > I think the 'favicon' topic is very special, and I neither appreciate a > extra link element use nor a CSS integration for it, that's both inelegantly > for > me. Either define a common place and name for it (as exists and often works > as 'favicon.ico' in the server root) and leave it from markup, or integrate > it > e.g. as a <title /> attribute like > > <title icon="./foo/bar.gif" /> > > > All the best, > Jens.> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The information contained in this message is proprietary of Amdocs, > > protected from disclosure, and may be privileged. > > The information is intended to be conveyed only to the designated > recipient(s) > > of the message. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, > > you are hereby notified that any dissemination, use, distribution or copying > of > > this communication is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. > > If you have received this communication in error, please notify us > immediately > > by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. > > Thank you. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Received on Monday, 30 June 2003 14:44:27 UTC