Re: Propose update webwml://template/debian/header.wml
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 09:29:00PM +0100, Rob Bradford wrote:
> > > I was looking at #130325 when I realized that favicon.ico was not
> > > displayed for www.debian.org. So here comes a patch to solve this
> > > problem.
> > > --- header.wml Sun Oct 13 22:09:51 2002
> > > +++ header.wml.new Sun Oct 13 22:11:49 2002
> > > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
> > > <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=$(CHARSET)" />
> > > <title>$(BARETITLE:*Debian GNU/Linux -- )$(title)</title>
> > > <link rev="made" href="mailto:email@example.com" />
> > > +<link rel="Shortcut Icon" href="$(HOME)/favicon.ico" />
> > > <meta name="Description" content="$(SUMMARY:-<blurb/>)" />
> > > <meta name="Keywords" content="<keywords/>" />
> > > <meta name="Language" content="$(CUR_LANG)" />
> > I object, this adds a bunch of more bytes to all web pages, and it's rather
> > unnecessary.
> I completely agree. If this gets added to standard, then Josip i think you
> should rethink your stance. However until that time different browsers do
> different things. None of which can be called the Right Thing (tm).
> For example some expect ico format, others png. Some try to download them,
> others look for the meta header. The whole situation is a mess that needs
Oh, I feel that the whole concept of favicon is unnecessary, I don't
particularly care about the implementation. Even if W3C adds this to
XHTML 5.0 or something, we aren't using that standard. :)
And then there's the usual retort that can be applied for almost anything --
it's easy to go around adding silly little cosmetic things like this, but
there's many more serious things on the web pages that we should fix
2. That which causes joy or happiness.