[thelist] ssi on windows 2000?

[martin.p.burns at uk.pwcglobal.com]

Memo from Martin P Burns of PricewaterhouseCoopers

-------------------- Start of message text --------------------

Malcolm

The container file (ie the one at the URL which the user
sees) would normally be .asp, and the included file (ie the
bit you are bringing in) would normally be .inc

Does IIS allow recursive SSIs the way Apache does?

Cheers
Martin

<tip type="Easy building with SSI containers in Apache">
Here's the contents of my .htaccess file for http://www.easyweb.co.uk/

AddType text/x-server-parsed-html .fhtml .html
Options FollowSymLinks Includes

This means that the server parses .html files for SSIs, so you
(and search engines...) don't need to know that there's dynamic
stuff happening behind the scenes. The included files are all .fhtml
(fragment of HTML), but we're parsing them for SSIs too.

This allows me to build a page with a hierarchy of SSI containers.
The main page essentially has 3 bits - a top include, the content, and
a bottom include. Very, very easy to check, edit and so on. And hey - the
content's separated from the presentation (sweet).

But each of those includes is a file with further includes (actually XSSI
ones to do things like conditional printable templates), which breaks the
stuff above and below the content down into further containers - one
include per container. Some of these are script SSIs btw, like for the
crumbtrail. However, it's all done at a block level.

Below this, there is generally a bunch of small include files, each of
which contains a module, like the Search Engine form, or the dtd etc.

Because this is all modular, it's very easy to add another standard
module - you find the include at the next level above, and add it there.
One file edited updates the whole site.

But doesn't this impact on the site performance? Not really (although it
might with a very high traffic site). SSIs have a pretty low impact on a
Unix/Apache server's resources, much, much lower than most language
interpreters. If the server's doing its job and caching the includes to a
certain extent, you won't even get much disk access either.

A number of industrial CMSs take this approach (cached containers) -
Vignette's one of them - and gain very high levels of maintainability
without sacrificing performance

</tip>



Please respond to thelist at lists.evolt.org

Sent by:  thelist-admin at lists.evolt.org

To:   thelist at lists.evolt.org
cc:


Subject:  [thelist] ssi on windows 2000?




Do all included files need to be named .inc or .asp to perform ssi on an
NT/200 platform??




--------------------- End of message text --------------------

The principal place of business of PricewaterhouseCoopers and its associate
partnerships is 1 Embankment Place, London WC2N 6NN where lists of the
partners' names are available for inspection. All partners in the associate
partnerships are authorised to conduct business as agents of, and all
contracts for services to clients are with, PricewaterhouseCoopers. The UK
firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers is authorised by the Institute of Chartered
Accountants in England and Wales to carry on investment business.
PricewaterhouseCoopers is a member of the world-wide
PricewaterhouseCoopers organisation.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
material.  Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.   If you received
this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any
computer.