IETF Logo Mail Archive

deprecate icon and logo elements?

James Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Wed, 13 October 2010 17:19 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 26D7A3A697A for <ietfarch-atompub-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 10:19:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.708
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.708 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.739, BAYES_40=-0.185, 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 HScaoijlc+HQ for <ietfarch-atompub-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 10:19:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM [207.182.41.81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0E5C3A698B for <atompub-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 10:19:21 -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 o9DGx8Kx012702 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 13 Oct 2010 09:59:08 -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 o9DGx84s012701; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 09:59:08 -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 mail-qy0-f171.google.com (mail-qy0-f171.google.com [209.85.216.171]) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o9DGx7ok012696 for <atom-syntax@imc.org>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 09:59:07 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from jasnell@gmail.com)
Received: by qyk9 with SMTP id 9so748011qyk.16 for <atom-syntax@imc.org>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 09:59:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=oB3v9+oT3xEfst0smyd7l/koTc1HcOU9JKeoVaUqiDs=; b=UiGVPDVaxGzv8dyMJylFd3oAYk5QEdjXxH68Uupg4UOdZWIO3MoM6ATQlFgyobauQL G/24MzEpbQh3DO2gNyPzNUEJxXvw5FkdYB6DNm57c5KfPSacLI85ImGIPQZD2KmCWg3J yCZA8OmX6jPud3dO8BNK6gbcyr1f32fKmUO2w=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=COHOwO+5PLq3RSUVMRzJkVzBXD25XRn/cZQl3O9G3udZmskUdunySr8fQe5zTd8C1q xTZCoLVjrW7AQIcnDwX/Ep+Sgyhg7auM3+1jV8KgQil7pctpnR4vyPy/+2/6kcnpR4ys jcwev0Ru9adR/+I0rYCwZ2oLEQnAdgqoGuEIY=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.227.81 with SMTP id iz17mr7804180qcb.2.1286989146713; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 09:59:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.114.194 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 09:59:06 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 09:59:06 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTindu=8nYPsPs2WjJPwWTY7m3avyonsTtTQ1_6SM@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: deprecate icon and logo elements?
From: James Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
To: Atom-Syntax <atom-syntax@imc.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00163630f28deb708b049282825a
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>

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