On 04/12/2012 09:33 PM, Phil Pennock wrote: > "index.shtml" should probably go: that's for server-side includes, as > processed by Apache and some other servers. The <!--#something --> > stuff, a bit like PHP or other inline scripting markup systems.
Speaking purely for myself, I've never seen .xhtm used as an extension for .xhtml. Doesn't hurt us to include it, of course. Agreed re: omitting .shtml and ensuring correct Content-Type: headers. With that said, I think the order in which they're served up is mostly irrelevant, so long as that order is well documented. _______________________________________________ Sks-devel mailing list Sks-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/sks-devel
