<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"><title type="text">WeirdLooking.com: Michael Barton's Blog</title><rights>Copyright 2006</rights><author><name>Michael Barton</name><email>palrich@gmail.com</email></author><updated>2012-02-05T07:59:07Z</updated><generator>WeirdLooking.com</generator><logo>http://www.weirdlooking.com/images/feed.png</logo><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.weirdlooking.com/" /><link rel="self" type="application/xml+atom" href="http://www.weirdlooking.com/atom/tag/avatars" /><id>http://www.weirdlooking.com/</id><entry><title type="text">which portable avatar is right for me?</title><author><name>Michael Barton</name></author><link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.weirdlooking.com/blog/which-portable-avatar-is-right-for-me" /><id>http://www.weirdlooking.com/blog/which-portable-avatar-is-right-for-me</id><published>2006-10-02T09:08:46Z</published><updated>2006-10-02T09:08:46Z</updated><content type="html">I like the idea of avatars that travel with you, but which of these is the &amp;ldquo;right thing&amp;rdquo;?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravatar&quot; style=&quot;position: relative; padding-left: 8px; zoom: 1;&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;position: absolute; top: -5px; left: 0px; width: 16px; height: 16px; background: URL(http://www.weirdlooking.com/exticon?http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FGravatar) no-repeat center center; -moz-opacity: 0.3; opacity: 0.3; filter:alpha(opacity=30);&quot;&gt;&lt;/span&gt;Gravatars&lt;/a&gt; are really popular and easy to implement, but it seems like the centralized nature would make it failure-prone and a privacy debacle waiting to happen.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Favatar&quot; style=&quot;position: relative; padding-left: 8px; zoom: 1;&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;position: absolute; top: -5px; left: 0px; width: 16px; height: 16px; background: URL(http://www.weirdlooking.com/exticon?http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFavatar) no-repeat center center; -moz-opacity: 0.3; opacity: 0.3; filter:alpha(opacity=30);&quot;&gt;&lt;/span&gt;Favatars&lt;/a&gt; are a cool idea.&amp;nbsp; On the plus side, they&amp;rsquo;d start working right away.&amp;nbsp; On the other hand, I&amp;rsquo;m not sure how many people have their own favicons, and the implementation would be a bit &amp;ldquo;fun&amp;rdquo;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavatar&quot; style=&quot;position: relative; padding-left: 8px; zoom: 1;&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;position: absolute; top: -5px; left: 0px; width: 16px; height: 16px; background: URL(http://www.weirdlooking.com/exticon?http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPavatar) no-repeat center center; -moz-opacity: 0.3; opacity: 0.3; filter:alpha(opacity=30);&quot;&gt;&lt;/span&gt;Pavatars&lt;/a&gt; have all the same problems as Favatars, they can just be bigger than 16x16px and aren&amp;rsquo;t tied to the favicon displayed by browsers.</content><category term="website" /><category term="avatars" /><link rel="comments" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.weirdlooking.com/atom/comments/74" /><wfw:commentRss>http://www.weirdlooking.com/atom/comments/74</wfw:commentRss><slash:comments>29</slash:comments></entry></feed>
