On 16 Jan 2006, at 12:15, Svip wrote:
I thought that per standard you inserted the favicon.ico file in the parent directory to the site, and thus browsers would ask for it, and get it as they requested! The HTML is just if you specific pages on a site that needs their own favicons!
As far as I can tell from looking through the W3C's site, the HTML standard doesn't touch upon the issue of page icons: there are just various methods people have hacked onto the existing standards. The hard-coded “look-in-the-root-directory” version seems to me the hackier and far less flexible version, although strictly speaking one should declare a profile in the <head> tag if one wishes to define alternative link types with the <link> method.
Oh, and if we're still going by the book, the “rel” attribute of <link> is specified to be a space-separated list, so requiring ‘rel="shortcut icon"’ doesn't conform to the proper specifications (not really surprising, it being a Microsoft invention); in fact, Mozilla browsers (and probably others too) only require ‘rel="icon"’. The <link> approach also allows you to specify alternate image formats for your page icon, such as PNG.
-- Dave ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
