CaT wrote: > Why should he have to? I thought the point to Mozilla (or at least one > of them) was to NOT make a broken client. A client that requests > something other then what is on a webpage is broken.
If you are talking about an HTTP client, I don't think that is true. I don't think you'll find anything in the HTTP spec that says a client can only requests objects referenced on an HTML page. In fact, I don't think you'll find much about HTML in any HTTP client spec. Requesting favicon.ico may be somewhat impolite, but it is definitly not an example of "broken" behavior. It's amazing how much anger this feature is generating. Particularly since it amounts to giving content providers *MORE* control over the presentation of their content than HTML allows directly without breaking HTML, HTTP, or anything else. --Mike
