W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > October 2001

Re: Validator (CVS 7-10)

From: Lloyd Wood <l.wood@eim.surrey.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 12:34:04 +0100 (BST)
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
cc: Coen Rosdorff <coen@rosdorff.dyndns.org>, www-validator <www-validator@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0110081230590.3850-100000@phaestos.ee.surrey.ac.uk>
On Mon, 8 Oct 2001, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:

> * Coen Rosdorff wrote:
> >Just pulled the validator from CVS.
> >The includes in index.html didn't worked until I changed it's name to
> >.shtml.
> >
> >It's not mentioned in the sample http.conf that also .html should be
> >handled as server-parsed.
> >
> >I think all the names should be changed to .shtml.
> 
> No, if it's HTML, name it .html (however, URIs should not carry file
> name extensions...) otherwise you have to rename it again if you do not
> use SSI any longer or switch to PHP or something like that. Additionally
> users have a harder job to remember whether it was .html, .htm, .shtml,
> etc.pp. thus naming SSI files .shtml is a very bad idea.

Apache's mod_speling handles such remembering problems nicely for
users (case too). Wasn't content negotiation supposed to take
us into a Brave New World without file extensions?

L.

<L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>PGP<http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/>
Received on Monday, 8 October 2001 07:34:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:13:59 GMT