[WEB4LIB] RE: Which is appropriate .htm or .html?

[Henrik E. Hornemann]

I recall having a problem concerning external stylesheets when using .htm
which disapeared when renamed to .html.
I dont remember the specifics of the problem, but I think it was only in
Netscape. There also was a difference whether I viewed the files from my
harddisk or the server. I think the problem only occured on the server.
Sorry I cant be more specific, but i'm not going to rename all my files on
all my sites (not to mention the links) to recreate the problem.

Henrik Hornemann
Librarian & Webmaster 
Greenland Business School


> As others have already said, either is okay as long as your server is
> happy.  However, I recall finding while designing our website that some
> browsers (I think it was IE4.x) were not highlighting followed links
> correctly with one of these extensions (.html probably, since I see that
> my site is standardized on .htm).  We are using IIS4.0 as our server.
> This may, however, be an MS problem rather than a general issue.
> 
> David
> 
> David S. Vaughan
> Wentworth Libraries
> Hamilton, ON, Canada
> 
> dvaughan at wentworth.library.on.ca
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:	jay [SMTP:jay at ccpl.ci.corpus-christi.tx.us]
> > Sent:	Wednesday, April 21, 1999 11:23 AM
> > To:	Multiple recipients of list
> > Subject:	[WEB4LIB] Which is appropriate .htm or .html?
> > 
> > Thanks to all who responded w/r/t my question on SHTML...
> > 
> > I've got another one: what are the rules governing the use of the
> > .htm/.html extensions in webpages? I've got an .html extension for the
> > main/index page on our website. The rest use .htm. This doesn't seem
> > to
> > cause any problems or consternation with anyone. Does it really
> > matter?
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > JHF