- 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>
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 UTC