Re: XHTML file extensions

> The current filename format limits file extensions to three letters,  
> which has given us
> .htm (a common and widely-recognized alternative to .html), and .xht  
> (uncommon). The
> reason for 3-letter file extensions was that, at the time the format  
> was devised, some
> platforms could not handle 4-letter extensions.
>
> I'm wondering if it would help testers if we changed .xht to .xhtml  
> or .xml, and if it's
> possible to do so now without limiting our testing audience. (It's  
> easy for us to send the
> correct MIME type on the servers either way. The question is whether  
> it would help people
> writing and running tests locally, and if so, whether it would not  
> interfere with less
> common test environments.)

The majority of test cases that I submit for inclusion in the  
testsuite, test the implementation of IE8. Since IE8 doesn't support  
application/xhtml+xml, i have to first devise a test using text/html  
(by using the .htm or .html file extension), and then rename them  
to .xht, since this is a current requirement of test case submission.

So to answer your original question, no, I don't have any issue with  
limiting or derestricting types of file extension, other than the fact  
that a > 3-letter extension seems to me a more widely used format  
across the web.

The issue I have however, is that testers are currently restricted to  
submitting .xht (or .xhtml type files, as is being proposed here)  
files. Can it not be possible for testers to submit .html files, with  
its inherent text/html format? Does the issue with restricting test  
cases to .xht lie with well-formedness?
>

Received on Tuesday, 9 February 2010 07:49:40 UTC