HTML vs. HTM

[doriansmith]

Where I work, we were told that HTM webpages would not work under the new .NET environment. We were told that all webpages MUST have the extender of HTML or they won't work.

Is it so?

[joelnet]

i'm not aware of any extensions not working in asp.net.

.html or .htm will both work fine.


Joel Thoms

DiscountASP.NET
http://www.DiscountASP.NET

[J.Bey]

Yep. I agree....





.htm or .html extension both defines an electronic document as a HTML document.http://community.discountasp.net/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

J. L.
Technical Support/IT Admin/MIS Developer
Maxtop Enterprises Inc.
http://www.maxtop.ca</CODE>

[edified]

Makes no difference. 'Course the best way to go about it is to exclude the extention entirely so that when you (and the rest of the world) changes architecture (for instance .html to .asp or .php or .xyz) your URIs remain intact. That's what the W3C recommends anyway- *sigh*

Example: edified.org/archive/illusions/chrominance (http://edified.org/archive/illusions/chrominance) is not a directory it's an executable (as in ASP).

One other method of doing this is URL rewriting which I think has been pretty well documented with ASP.net 2.0 (though I haven't searched).

Ed Palma (http://edified.org/resume) - edified.org (http://edified.org/)

Post Edited (Edified) : 11/26/2006 12:22:04 AM GMT