IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: deprecate icon and logo elements?

Sam Johnston <samj@samj.net> Thu, 14 October 2010 00:09 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-atompub-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-atompub-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F2853A6A40 for <ietfarch-atompub-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:09:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.865
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.865 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-3.642, BAYES_50=0.001, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_44=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6777dA1JgZy1 for <ietfarch-atompub-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:09:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM [207.182.41.81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D5A33A6A6F for <atompub-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:09:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o9E03OIZ031074 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:03:24 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.13.5/Submit) id o9E03O6X031073; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:03:24 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hoffman.proper.com: majordom set sender to owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org using -f
Received: from eu1sys200aog111.obsmtp.com (eu1sys200aog111.obsmtp.com [207.126.144.131]) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with SMTP id o9E03LxS031068 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <atom-syntax@imc.org>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:03:23 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from samj@samj.net)
Received: from source ([209.85.160.182]) by eu1sys200aob111.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP ID DSNKTLZIyPFnWzGC3rqeS8tIM+f9YWxprMuz@postini.com; Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:03:23 UTC
Received: by gyf3 with SMTP id 3so2643931gyf.41 for <atom-syntax@imc.org>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:03:20 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.100.10.15 with SMTP id 15mr4918340anj.9.1287014599831; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:03:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.100.128.19 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 17:03:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTindu=8nYPsPs2WjJPwWTY7m3avyonsTtTQ1_6SM@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTindu=8nYPsPs2WjJPwWTY7m3avyonsTtTQ1_6SM@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 20:03:19 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTik3F9mqEy5WxWO2vpN5YqtpBX+rgBKuDrAEk7hi@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: deprecate icon and logo elements?
From: Sam Johnston <samj@samj.net>
To: James Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Cc: Atom-Syntax <atom-syntax@imc.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e64652fa0b32d004928870ce
Sender: owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:atom-syntax-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <atom-syntax.imc.org>

+1

Simple >> Complex.

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 12:59 PM, James Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ok, this is something that has bugged me for quite a white... the atom:icon
> and atom:logo elements are terribly underspecified as just a simple IRI.
> Those these really should be link objects. What I'd like to propose is a
> deprecation of those elements in favor of <link rel="icon" href="..." /> and
> <link rel="image" href="..." />. The icon and image rel attributes would be
> added to the registry of link relations...
>
> So instead of..
>
> <feed>
>   <icon>http://.../image.jpg</icon>
>   ...
> </feed>
>
> It would be...
>
> <feed>
>   <link rel="icon" href="http://.../image.jpg" type="image/jpeg" />
>   ...
> </feed>
>
> The nice thing about this approach is that it does not actually require any
> changes to the spec. The icon and image rel values would be added to the
> registry and implementations would need to be modified to look for them as
> an alternative to the icon and logo elements.
>
> Thoughts?
>

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email