Hi y'all I've only been working with PHP for the past 2-3 weeks, so there's alot of things I haven't quite grasped 100% yet ...
Basically what I'm doing is converting my old framed, js-driven, HTML website, with 137 physical pages (individual HTML files) and some dynamically created ones, into a full-fledged PHP site ... As the whole idea in this is to get rid of the frameset, and reuse as much code as entirely possible, I'm using 5-6 PHP "master" files (I'm only through converting little more than half the site by now), which then mix and match variables to include the right files for bodies and menus and such... But here's the real Q: Does it matter at all what extension I use for the include() source files??? I mean, they're the old HTML files that I strip down to the most basic, with a few HTML tags to control the formatting, so my though pattern is that .html is wrong, because it's not real HTML (in that it lacks everything that makes them HTML), and it's not really .txt, because it contains formatting characters ... so in lack of better, I decided to name them .psrc (for PHP source) ... Right now I'm only running the site on test-basis on my own PHP on Apache on WinXP, where it works well, nomatter what ext I use (provided I remember to update the include() command to reflect it of course. But it's going to be uploaded to a webhotel I haven't bought yet ... so I just want to know: Do I risk any functionality in using my own extensions? Or does PHP as a general not care about the include() extensions??? I do have some .php includes, because they run PHP code, but most of my includes are just text that needs to put in the right part of a table... TIA Rene -- Rene Brehmer System developer in the making... This message was written on 100% recycled spam. My website: http://www.geocities.com/cerberus_hotdog Babes and computer & internet references... -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
