Having the templates with an html extension allows easier integration
with you preferred html editor, such as Dreamweaver. ("edit with")
Whereas you may want xml documents opened with Notepad++ (Great, by
the way), etc.If anything, they should be .xhtml documents. Another problem might be that some browsers may not have their mime types properly set--about the only mime type you can guarantee to work is for html. I think xml and xhtml are delivered as something other than text usually. This is pretty old, but check out: http://www.ookingdom.com/design/xhtml On 9/17/07, Christian Gruber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It occurs to me that having .html as a file extension on the template > files is weird, especially since they are by necessity well-formed xml > documents, which html documents are not. Since they might be other > kinds of documents than xhtml, would it make more sense to have them > called .xml documents? It's a small thing, but worth considering. > > Christian. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
