Posted by Andrew DeFaria on 01/26/06 07:34

d wrote:
> I mean as in you are showing the world what technology you're using :)
Who the hell cares? I mean aside from you!
> The pages are spitting out HTML, and so logically should have a .html
> extension when the browser sees them
Hmmmm... That logic doesn't even make sense. You can have a Perl script
or a .exe file that "spits out" just text. Should such files have a .txt
extension?!? The .html signifies that the file contains HTML - and
pretty much only HTML. A php script contains both HTML and PHP code so
technically speaking it's not just HTML.
> (as the extension signifies the contents of the file, even though web
> browsers shouldn't use that to determine the contents of the file,
> people still do).
Why do you think that browsers shouldn't determine the contents of the
file from it's extension? Truth is it does, multiple times over in many,
many different occasions. Ever hear of mime.types? Ever actually
configure an Apache server?

And what's so wrong about doing that anyway? Until and unless we have a
robust and reliable object oriented and typed file system extensions
will be the way to go.
--
For my birthday I got a humidifier and a de-humidifier...I put them in
the same room and let them fight it out...

[Back to original message]