Re: Decisions on Bugs

["David Adam Bordoley" <bordoley msu edu>]

Osma Ahvenlampi writes: 

> On Sun, 2003-12-21 at 03:14, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
> > > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116678
> > > Favicon support 
> >
> > I think this should be NOTABUG. 
> >
> > - Of the two specs one is definately better then the other
> > - Causing 404 on servers isnt really a nice idea
> > - It's not unreasonable to expect more and more servers to
> > follow the new spec
> > - The lack of favicons for some sites is not a critical problem
>
> I want to point out that favicons are a usability improvement - being
> able to see which window is which from just the titlebar, window list or
> desk switcher icons is a boon for anyone like me with lots and lots of
> windows open. 
>
> So forgive my strong language, but block-headedly insisting on a spec
> that isn't followed by 98% of Internet users, and as a result, 95% of
> web site owners, is hurting usability here. We're not lacking favicons
> for "some sites", but most of them. Of my 1200 bookmarks, about 20 show
> favicons in Ephy. 

I somewhat agree with this setiment. Does IE support the "new spec"? If it 
doesn't than the new spec is essentially worthless. I realize this is a 
chicken and egg problem and in an ideal world everyone would follow the 
spec, but in the reality this is just going to make normal users perceive 
epiphany as an inferior browser to IE because it doesn't support icons that 
seem to work in that "other browser." 

This is not to say we shouldn't encourage use of the new spec, but not 
supporting a widely deployed pseudo-standard is only going to hurt us in the 
short term. 

dave