I couldn't find any immediate evidence that Firefox would use one of the images in the meta tags instead of the shortcut icon, but that seems to be happening. Could you create a test page where you specify different images for the various meta tags and see which one Firefox uses? Does the order matter?

Oops, never mind. Firefox is picking up the thumbnail size image, not the one specified in the meta tags. So probably the second of these:

<link href="https://photos.smugmug.com/Porftolio/UnitedStates2/Utah/Utah-Other/i-CDr7rZJ/5/Th/_DSC1823-Th.jpg" rel="apple-touch-icon" sizes="94x150"> <link href="https://photos.smugmug.com/Porftolio/UnitedStates2/Utah/Utah-Other/i-CDr7rZJ/5/Th/_DSC1823-Th.jpg" rel="icon" sizes="94x150">

SmugMug agrees that FF is picking up the wrong coding.

Can you get FF to fix it?

Burying the favicon image that deep in folders might contribute to that problem. And putting a character such as the apostrophe sure doesn't help matters. https://photos.smugmug.com/Avatar/AVATAR/i-V59k4Vz/1/16x16!/Clown_favicon-16x16!.png

How about putting that image in the root directory and naming it clown_favicon.png or just favicon.png and see how that works.

Or maybe convert that png image to the ico image format and have an image called favicon.ico, as was the correct way of doing things 20 years ago when Favicons came in to use in HTML.

Apparently Chrome has no problem with the way the favicon is set up. It shows up correctly on Chrome.

It is Firefox that I'm having a problem with.......

Also......the favicon used to work fine on FF........ It is only recently that it stopped working. And I have not changed a thing on my website.

There is a very old bug where this was decided to not be fixed. 110296. However if you would like to bring it up again you can file a bug in webcompat.com

In the meantime, the suggestions above are great suggested work arounds.

Why should I implement a work around when this has worked on FF for years? And it works right now on Chrome!

FF should fix the "bug".....not tell customers to implement work-arounds that might not work with other browsers.

Based on my research, Firefox treats these interchangeably, and uses the last image specified:

<link rel="shortcut icon"> <link rel="icon">

Since the SmugMug link tag follows yours, you get the image they define.

There is a bug on file to choose the image with the most appropriate dimensions as the favicon (751712), which would resolve this issue because the Smugmug thumbnail is much larger than needed for a favicon. But don't expect that fix in the near future; it hasn't been submitted yet and it will be in testing after that.

Meanwhile, if you want to work around this, have your link tag follow theirs instead of preceding it. If they allow that.

jscher2000 said

Based on my research, Firefox treats these interchangeably, and uses the last image specified: <link rel="shortcut icon"> <link rel="icon"> Since the SmugMug link tag follows yours, you get the image they define. There is a bug on file to choose the image with the most appropriate dimensions as the favicon (751712), which would resolve this issue because the Smugmug thumbnail is much larger than needed for a favicon. But don't expect that fix in the near future; it hasn't been submitted yet and it will be in testing after that. Meanwhile, if you want to work around this, have your link tag follow theirs instead of preceding it. If they allow that.

Thank you for your reply.

First, what is the process for getting this fix submitted? If the bug is "on file", couldn't it be included in a update soon along with other random fixes? Certainly it would not require a lot of time to fix.

Second, I will pas this information on to SmugMug. But I would think that asking them to spend time to work around a FF bug that FF is not willing to fix will be a low priority.

Since Chrome does not have this bug, it might be better for the millions of SmugMug users....and all their customers switch to Chrome.

There's not an infinite amount of staffing to fix bugs with a low priority. This definitely is back in line behind fixing crashes and other features the typical user feels strongly about. Hopefully it will get fixed eventually.

If you want to tell your site visitors that you care more about the tiny favicon they probably don't even notice than letting them view your site in their preferred browser, you are free to do that.

OR......I can suggest they use Chrome and see both my site and the favicon.

Very hostile response to a user!

butlerkid said

Very hostile response to a user!

Don't take it personally. Support volunteers work with the Firefox we have today. I do not have a magic wand. I have explained the reason for your problem, given you a workaround, and give you what I think is a realistic assessment of the situation.

Also, to understand what I mean about priorities, try helping out here for 72 hours: https://support.mozilla.org/questions/firefox?show=all

butlerkid said

OR......I can suggest they use Chrome and see both my site and the favicon.

Sure, act like a pre-school child and threaten to take your toys and go home when things don't go your way! Or work exactly the way that your think they should work.

Very hostile response to a user!

I am a user - a support volunteer trying to help you; as is jscher2000. Of the people who tried to help you here only guigs works for Mozilla!

You have broken website and have been offered 2 suggestions about how to fix it!