- From: Ian S. Graham <igraham@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>
- Date: Wed, 7 Feb 96 14:19:03 EST
- To: philipp@res.enst.fr
- Cc: www-html@www10.w3.org
> I've noticed that books don't seem to be very
> consistent about the syntax of server-side includes.
>
> One sees:
The first one is correct.
The idea is to place the entire include command within a comment --
then, if the document is served out by a server that does not support
server-side includes, the include command is commented out and is
ignored. Most browsers understand a coment to start with
<!-- and end with -->. Therefore the format
<!--#config timefmt="%d %b %Y"-->
is correct. The form
<!--#config timefmt="%d %b %Y">
is wrong, as the comment is unterminated -- if the document is
*not* parsed by the server, then the user agent sees the <!--,
and everything after the <!-- is treated as a comment, and is
not displayed.
Ian
--
Ian Graham .................................. igraham@hprc.utoronto.ca
Information Commons Tel: 416-978-4548
University of Toronto Fax: 416-978-6110
> <!--#config timefmt="%d %b %Y"-->
>
> or
>
> <!--#config timefmt="%d %b %Y">
>
> sometimes even both in the same text (e.g. Mary Morris's book).
>
> Which is right? I suspect the later... Indeed, the former
> causes some servers to gobble the file to the next comment or
> the end of the document.
>
> In any case, I couldn't get the CERN server (1.3) to change
> the timefmt when doing a <!--#echo var="LAST_MODIFIED"-->...
>
> -Philip
>
Received on Wednesday, 7 February 1996 14:19:18 UTC