Asko Tontti ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) schrieb... > Ben Goodger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I see the /favicon.ico thing as a great convenience. I can define an > > icon for my whole site in one hit, and then use <link> to selectively > > override it for certain pages. This, I believe, offers the most > > flexibility one could possibly want. > > For the greater convenience Mozilla should implement /favstyle.css > that will be automaticly fetched by Mozilla if pages don't have <link > rel="stylesheet" ...> > > And how about document.all? It would be greate convenience for web > designers if they don't have to fix their pages to work with Mozilla. > > And so on.
And if /favicon.ico is a good idea, also /favbackground.jpg as a default site background would be much better then having to insert this on every single page... If someone wants to use a background picture on his site, he has to insert a <BODY BACKGROUND="imagename.jpg"> on his page, if someone wants to use a stylesheet on his site, he has to insert some <LINK REL="stylesheet" HREF="stylename.css"> on his page. And if someone wants a spezial icon for his page, I can't think of any reason, why he shouldn't have to insert a <LINK REL="icon" ...>. I don't think providing a favicon is so elementary for html-pages that it justifys to search for files not referenced in any way on the page. Also there are some problems with this behavior: Eg. T-Online is a popular ISP in Germany, the homepages have addresses like http://home.t-online.de/home/<username>/ . If there exists a http://home.t-online.de/favicon.ico, every hompage would be shown with this T-Online-Icon. By default there would be shown a icon, propably having nothing in common with the contents of the webpages. And most of the users wouldn't even realize, why this happens and what they can do against ist. And can they do anything besides linking to a own favicon on every page? Is there any way to get displayed *no favicon* (get back the browsers default icon), if /favicon.ico exists? Also with this feature, there is introduced a new "reserved filename", what is no good idea. Someone who isn't aware of the spezial use of this filename (eg. I wasn't) can cause unexpected behavior of his page. The only other "reserved filenames" I know are "index.htm(l)" and "/robots.txt" and I don't think the favicon feature is important enough to introduce a new one. Stephan -- Alkohol ist keine Antwort, aber man vergisst beim Trinken die Frage. (Henry Mon)
