See Craig McClanahan's email -- it's implementation dependent with JSP.
Resin, for example, doesn't create a servlet if you have a JSP with just
static content (no scripting code). Resin serves up the file to the browser
just like IIS and ASPs with no dynamic content. But the other point someone
else made was good -- if there's no static content in the page, just let it
be served as an HTML doc.
Scott Stirling
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2000 2:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Developing sites with JSP and HTML
MS IIS 5.0 doesn't actually interpret .asp files that have no dynamic
content. It's as good as plain 'ol HTML. So, there's no overhead. Not
true abt. JSPs, I guess.
:-((
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Bang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 5:24 PM
Subject: Developing sites with JSP and HTML
> HTML files become JSP files just by changing the extension to .jsp and
using
> a JSP engine, but I assume it is more efficient to use the .jsp extension
> only when exploiting JSP advantages. Is this true? Within a single web
> site it would seem to make sense to have both types of pages present on
the
> site. So, the question I have is does it ever make sense to use the .jsp
> extension on all pages within a site? At least on Microsoft's site, it
> seems that almost all pages are ASP files, even when an HTML file would
> probably work fine. Similarly, what do I gain or give up by making all
> pages JSP files?
>
> Thanks,
> Steve
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe: mailto [EMAIL PROTECTED] with body: "signoff JSP-INTEREST".
Some relevant FAQs on JSP/Servlets can be found at:
http://java.sun.com/products/jsp/faq.html
http://www.esperanto.org.nz/jsp/jspfaq.html
http://www.jguru.com/jguru/faq/faqpage.jsp?name=JSP
http://www.jguru.com/jguru/faq/faqpage.jsp?name=Servlets
