[Wylug-discuss] a webdesign query / mini rant

[John Hodrien]

Dave Fisher wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 04:52:28PM +0000, John Hodrien wrote:
>> Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 10:01:23AM +0000, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>>  <link rel="shortcut icon" href="favicon.ico">
>>> Oops, bad copy and paste error.
>>>
>>> As Steve Garton pointed out, that should have been something like:
>>>
>>>  <link rel="shortcut icon" href="images/rebs.ico" type="image/x-icon">
>>>
>>> The mime type attribute should matter, but is frequently lacking from
>>> elements which it aught to be declared on.
>> I'm confused, I don't see what's wrong with the first one.  Why is the the 
>> type required?
> 
> I have just taken a quick glance around the HTML 4.01 spec and found
> nothing which suggests that the mime type is either required or advised.
> 
> Having noted that, I still think that it is good practice to specify
> mime types, especially when using the <link> element.
> 
> Not least among my reasons for saying so, is the habitual tendency for
> MS-oriented software to ommit the mime type when it really is necessary.

Saying things twice is just wrong though IMO, as it adds potential for 
disagreement within a system as to what the mime-type actually should be.

> It's been quite common for Firefox and others to ignore stylesheet links
> if they ommit or misdefine the mime type, or webservers serve
> stylesheets with the wrong headers (text/html is one mistaken mime type
> declaration for css stylesheets that I've seen quite often).

I've no objection to them getting annoyed if they're told the wrong thing, but 
they shouldn't expect to be told the correct thing twice.

> Besides which, MS really aught to be taken to task for determing file
> types by filename extensions  .. that's just mad.

Absolutely, and it causes lots of pain for others.  It took me ages to get a 
website to sort out the mime-type for .asf files, as it was returning text/plain 
which funnily enough didn't work for non-IE.  I was told they were going to 
reencode the files to solve the problem...  Mime-type just doesn't exist within 
the microsoft world.  I suspect it's considered to be a file extension mapping 
issue and nothing more.

jh