RE: New site

With all the talk about extensions, I thought I'd put in my own reasons for
using a combination of both .htm and .html.

I use ColdFusion, which by default parses files with a .cfm extension.  I
didn't want to use the .cfm extension (a couple years ago some search
engines would not include files without .htm or .html extensions, much like
some ignore urls with variables), so I configured my webserver (WebSite
Professional) to parse .htm files, but not .html files.

With this setup, if I have a file that contains ColdFusion tags, I name it
.htm.  If it doesn't require CF, I give it a .html extension.

Hope this sheds a different light on the subject...

On the other hand, maybe if I used Novell instead of WebSite, or FrontPage
instead of HomeSite, I wouldn't have this freedom of choice.

Armando


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-hwg-graphics(at)hwg.org [mailto:owner-hwg-graphics(at)hwg.org]On
> Behalf Of Eric J Hoffman
> Sent: Viernes, 29 de Enero de 1999 10:16 p.m.
> To: Leland V. Lammert; Mike Taylor
> Cc: hwg-graphics(at)hwg.org; hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org
> Subject: RE: New site
>
>
> Lee,
>
> How would you deal with Cold Fusion then?  I must *certainly* be
> unprofessional because it is not a .html extension.  Please.
>
> Focus more on the elements of good site architecture, design, whathaveyou,
> but please lets not start judging when it appears you don't know all the
> facts.
>
> Eric J Hoffman
> Director of Internet Initiatives
> Meagher & Geer, PLLP
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org
> > [mailto:owner-hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org]On Behalf Of Leland V. Lammert
> > Sent: Thursday, January 28, 1999 8:46 AM
> > To: Mike Taylor
> > Cc: hwg-graphics(at)hwg.org; hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org
> > Subject: Re: New site
> >
> >
> > At 04:31 AM 1/28/99 -0500, Mike Taylor wrote:
> > >>
> > >>However, a lot of programs still default to .htm for some
> reason. It'll
> > >>work, but it's not "right" and looks unprofessional. Since most
> > computers
> > >>can handle more than 8.3, there's no reason why you shouldn't
> just save
> > >>your files on your computer as *.html
> > >
> > >
> > >How does using a certain file extension make a *file* look
> > unprofessional?
> > >What reason is there to add one extra character instead of just
> > using HTM?
> > >Answer:  there's no reason at all.  C'mon, this point is a bit
> > silly.   I'd
> > >be interested in official documentation indicating "right" and
> > "wrong" file
> > >extensions because I doubt any exist.
> > >
> > Mike,
> >
> > I would have to agree with the statement. If you let a site take '.htm'
> > extensions, it means you are subscribing to Gates'ism - Microsoft
> > CREATED the
> > .htm extension to be different. The .html extension is the W3C
> *original*
> > standard, which, IMHO, any professional would support.
> >
> > If you publish a site with .htm, you're just too lazy to make a
> > single change
> > to the default page, .. which, IMHO, should *also* be *named*
> > index.html (or,
> > you do not know your publishing software well enough, .. or you
> > don't care -
> > two additional reasons to label someone 'less than professional').
> >
> >         Lee
> >
> > ===========================================
> >    Leland V. Lammert, PhD                        Chief Scientist
> >    Omnitec Corporation                      Network Consulting
> >        lvl(at)omnitec.net                          www.omnitec.net
> > ===========================================
> >
>

HWG: hwg-graphics mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA