2 ms·

The article mentions SeaMonkey, currently the only browser that doesn’t fetch /favicon.ico by default. But yeah — some web apps rely on /favicon.ico as well. A

• benwerd 16y ago
  Downside: if you include it as an HTML link you can use a PNG file, whereas the version in the root has to be an icon file. Chances are, that's the only time you'll ever use the icon format, and many image apps don't support it. It's a weird throwback to another era, like the web equivalent of a vestigial tail.
  • bouncingsoul 16y ago
    I haven't done complete browser testing, but I know you can use a PNG and simply change the extension to .ico and it will still work in some browsers. Edit: I tested on a domain that previously didn't have a favicon. Putting a PNG named favicon.ico at the root without an explicit <link> worked in Chrome 9, Firefox 3.6, and Safari 5. It didn't work in IE 9.
    • strager 16y ago
      Maybe it'll work if you send the appropriate `Content-type`?
  • true_religion 16y ago
    Can't you just issue a 301 redirect from /favicon.ico to /favicon.png?
    • mathias 16y ago
      IE doesn’t support any other format than ICO for favicons. Redirects, spoofed MIME types or fake file extensions won’t change that.
      • wladimir 16y ago
        Is that also true for more recent versions of IE?