On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
That would mean http://annevankesteren.com/robots.txt cannot have an
icon, unless we revive the Link header somehow, but there wasn't much
interest in that.
Actually, there is now, at least on Google’s side, in the
: dinsdag 29 juli 2014 23:22
To: Anne van Kesteren
Cc: WHATWG
Subject: Re: [whatwg] apple-touch-icon
I'd really like to avoid sticking this in specs. We already have 3 ways of
adding icons, /favicon.ico, link rel=icon and link rel=manifest. That's
probably about 2 too many. We shouldn't add a 4th one
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Niels Keurentjes
niels.keurent...@omines.com wrote:
Given that the /favicon.ico fallback is really only there for IE5/6/7
compatibility to my knowledge,
Uhm, no. It's universally supported.
--
http://annevankesteren.nl/
- Original Message -
From: Niels Keurentjes niels.keurent...@omines.com
Cc: WHATWG wha...@whatwg.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 1:48:33 AM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] apple-touch-icon
Given that the /favicon.ico fallback is really only there for IE5/6/7
compatibility to my knowledge
...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
Anne van Kesteren
Sent: woensdag 30 juli 2014 10:52
To: Niels Keurentjes
Cc: WHATWG
Subject: Re: [whatwg] apple-touch-icon
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Niels Keurentjes
niels.keurent...@omines.com wrote:
Given that the /favicon.ico fallback is really only
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Niels Keurentjes
niels.keurent...@omines.com wrote:
The message to web developers should just be if you want icons, explicitly
specify them.
That would mean http://annevankesteren.com/robots.txt cannot have an
icon, unless we revive the Link header somehow,
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 4:59 PM, John Mellor joh...@google.com wrote:
Chrome 30 dropped support[1] for fetching apple-touch-icon-* from well known
URLs, since the 404 pages that are usually returned were consuming 3-4% of
all mobile bandwidth usage[2]. We're unlikely to reverse that.
Good to
On 29 July 2014 12:46, Mathias Bynens mathi...@opera.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 4:59 PM, John Mellor joh...@google.com wrote:
We still support apple-touch-icon-* via link rel under some circumstances
(e.g. for add to homescreen), but they're deprecated[3], since we'd like
authors
I'd really like to avoid sticking this in specs. We already have 3
ways of adding icons, /favicon.ico, link rel=icon and link
rel=manifest. That's probably about 2 too many. We shouldn't add a
4th one. Generally speaking, eventually I think manifests is what will
encourage the best UX and the
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
For link rel=icon we already define the /favicon.ico fallback. If a
page lacks link rel=icon sizes we should probably also look at
Apple's proprietary extension here given that it's quite widely
adopted. Chrome supports
Chrome 30 dropped support[1] for fetching apple-touch-icon-* from well
known URLs, since the 404 pages that are usually returned were consuming
3-4% of all mobile bandwidth usage[2]. We're unlikely to reverse that.
We still support apple-touch-icon-* via link rel under some circumstances
(e.g.
Using a single JPEG/PNG that is also part of the home page display is a way
to mitigate bandwidth used.
Another way to do this is to use an SVG for a logo - which browsers support
this now?
On 28 Jul 2014 07:59, John Mellor joh...@google.com wrote:
Chrome 30 dropped support[1] for fetching
For link rel=icon we already define the /favicon.ico fallback. If a
page lacks link rel=icon sizes we should probably also look at
Apple's proprietary extension here given that it's quite widely
adopted. Chrome supports it and there is some work going on in Firefox
as well:
some data here: http://indiewebcamp.com/icon
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 5:13 AM, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
For link rel=icon we already define the /favicon.ico fallback. If a
page lacks link rel=icon sizes we should probably also look at
Apple's proprietary extension here given
14 matches
Mail list logo
