5 ms·

I think I'm going to vomit if I see another web page written in the 21st century that condones the use of ICO format. Please, please, please can we have some k

by lyndonh 13y ago

I think I'm going to vomit if I see another web page written in the 21st century that condones the use of ICO format. Please, please, please can we have some kind of multi image PNG format ? How about multiple PNG images wrapped in a TIFF container ? With cross browser support, pretty please. Anything but ICO. ICO format is nasty.

audreyr 13y ago
That's what I thought too, until I did more research on ICO and couldn't come up with an answer for "Why use png in addition to ico?" in the FAQ (well, except for touch devices where ico isn't supported). Notice how that FAQ question is empty. But if you could submit a pull request with a bulleted list of PNG advantages over ICO, I'd be happy to include it. Seriously.
- lyndonh 13y ago
  PNG is a properly specified format with written documentation. ICO has many undefined and assumed values. The only reason you would use ICO for favicons instead of PNG is that it supports multiple images.
  - audreyr 13y ago
    What's your GitHub username? I'd be very interested in hearing more specifics and possibly collaborating to adjust the recommendations if needed.
e12e 13y ago
Awww. Without formats like BMP, ICO and friends, there are so many fewer libraries to exploit buffer overflows in!
mappu 13y ago
ICO is a kind of multi image PNG format.
- lyndonh 13y ago
  ICO is multi image BMP and it's poorly defined
  - mappu 13y ago
    PNG support was introduced to .ico format alongside Vista in ~2006, you can certainly use it as a multiple-png-only format. Wikipedia has a description of the file format and it's certainly not the worst i've seen - restricting yourself to only PNG images removes all the mess around skipping bmp headers and paletted colours, you end up with a very short and concise header and binary list format, and it should be trivially implemented from the description. Of course, i havn't implemented it myself, so it's obvious i'd say that. But i'm curious as to what issues you have with it / what you would change?

by lyndonh 13y ago

audreyr 13y ago

That's what I thought too, until I did more research on ICO and couldn't come up with an answer for "Why use png in addition to ico?" in the FAQ (well, except for touch devices where ico isn't supported). Notice how that FAQ question is empty. But if you could submit a pull request with a bulleted list of PNG advantages over ICO, I'd be happy to include it. Seriously.

lyndonh 13y ago
PNG is a properly specified format with written documentation. ICO has many undefined and assumed values. The only reason you would use ICO for favicons instead of PNG is that it supports multiple images.
- audreyr 13y ago
  What's your GitHub username? I'd be very interested in hearing more specifics and possibly collaborating to adjust the recommendations if needed.

e12e 13y ago

Awww. Without formats like BMP, ICO and friends, there are so many fewer libraries to exploit buffer overflows in!

mappu 13y ago

ICO is a kind of multi image PNG format.

lyndonh 13y ago
ICO is multi image BMP and it's poorly defined
- mappu 13y ago
  PNG support was introduced to .ico format alongside Vista in ~2006, you can certainly use it as a multiple-png-only format. Wikipedia has a description of the file format and it's certainly not the worst i've seen - restricting yourself to only PNG images removes all the mess around skipping bmp headers and paletted colours, you end up with a very short and concise header and binary list format, and it should be trivially implemented from the description. Of course, i havn't implemented it myself, so it's obvious i'd say that. But i'm curious as to what issues you have with it / what you would change?