Re: extra stuff in the headers
On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 10:11:06PM +0100, Peter Karlsson wrote:
> > To get favicon.ico displayed, we need to add more stuff to the headers.
>
> To force favicon.ico we need a
>
> <link rel="shortcut icon" href="wherever">
>
> some browsers (such as Opera 7) only fetches the icon if explicitly
> linked. Some will probably go for favicon.ico no matter what you write
> there, though. Explicitly linking to /favicon.ico and making sure it
> exists would probably work fairly well.
Yes, I know all this, but thanks for not making me spell it out again. :)
> > If we have lang=en, why do we need Language meta tag?
>
> The "Language" meta tag lists the natural name (in English) of the
> language, whereas the lang attribute lists the ISO code. But the meta
> Language stuff is non-standard, so it could easily be removed.
Quite.
> > If we have rev=made link tag, why do we need the Author meta tag?
>
> Because it lists a readable name instead of just an e-mail link? But I
> would rather go for a Dublin core meta element if we decide to keep it.
"Debian Webmaster" may be readable, but it's worthless nevertheless.
What's a Dublin core meta element?
> > If we have the modification stuff in the footer, why do we need the
> > Modified meta tag?
>
> The footer isn't really human-readable,
"Sun, Nov 3 02:33:08 UTC 2002" is not human-readable, but "2002-11-03
03:33:08" is? You meant it the other way around?
> and the HTTP header data is the HTML generation time.
>
> > If we know the wml version on www-master, and the date on the file,
> > why do we need the Generator meta tag?
>
> It's common to denote computer-generated pages with a generator meta
> tag, so I say that's one to keep.
Whether it's common doesn't quite explain why is it useful (both the HTML
generation time (which is mostly the default anyhow) and the existence of
the two tags)?
For stuff like wnpp pages, where the source date differs from HTML date,
I see a purpose. For everything else, it's just fodder.
> > If we have Google, why do we need the Keywords and Description meta
> > tags which ignores them? :)
>
> Especially since they suck anyway. The only places where we really use
> the keywords are in Debian Weekly News, in all the other they just use
> the standard string, which sucks. I say remove it unless the page
> overrides it (as in DWN).
Agreed. Anyone else?
> But I'd also like to see more <link> tags. I wonder whether it would be
> possible to add sensical autogenerated next/prev tags to the news,
> security and DWN pages?
Quite likely with a little bit of scripting.
> Also proper rel=contents pages would be nice, and probably a rel=help
> pointing to intro/cn.
Both of those look useful to me.
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Reply to: