[thelist] Standard File Extensions

[Steve Cook]

AFAIK there is no W3C mandated reason to use one format or the other. I've
always acted on the following principle:

IIS prefers .htm (potentially other MS focussed servers)
Apache and other servers prefer .html

In the default settings for IIS once upon a time, default.htm / default.asp
was the default page to be served when surfing to a directory
(www.domain.com/directory/ )

Apache on the other hand always chose index.html first.

Nowadays it is so easy to set in the server  preferences that you can
basically choose to work from whichever you prefer or is most convenient.

Hope that helps.

.steve

----------------------------------
   WapWarp - http://wapwarp.com
 Wap-Dev - http://www.wap-dev.net
 Cookstour - http://cookstour.org
----------------------------------

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Williamson [mailto:lakeridge_jim at hotmail.com]
> Sent: den 11 mars 2002 16:15
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: [thelist] Standard File Extensions
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know if the W3C has defined standard file
> extensions for either
> HTML 4.0 or XHTML 1.0?  In other words does the standards
> indicate whether
> my web pages should be page1.htm or page1.html.  Is there a
> good reason to
> use one over the other?
>
> TIA
>
> Jim Williamson
> Interactive Training Developer