Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [NH] Dumb question time again

Expand Messages
  • Don Passenger
    Usually the server is set to default to a particular file in each directory, and absent the existance of that file will display the file and directory
    Message 1 of 15 , Jan 4, 2001
      Usually the server is set to default to a particular file in each directory,
      and absent the existance of that file will display the file and directory
      structure.

      On many servers, the default file that is required is index.html or
      default.html or home.html. Often they will not read index.htm, etc., as the
      default file to display and will instead show the directory/file structure.

      All servers I have ever worked on will take .htm or .shtml or .html or
      xhtml files and display them fine, but they may not permit those as the
      default file. Some now allow index.htm or index.shtml to be the default
      file, but historically it was only index.html.

      ---
      Don Passenger
      Personal Page: http://www.iserv.net/~dpasseng
      Court Page: http://www.iserv.net/~dpasseng/grdc
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: <Wayland_B_Fowler@...>
      To: <ntb-html@egroups.com>
      Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 3:19 PM
      Subject: RE: [NH] Dumb question time again


      > >Cool! Now I know! I knew that some Unix web servers accepted the .htm
      > extension, I just didn't know for sure which ones. Thanks for adding to my
      > knowledge Bill.
      >
      >
      > Actually the use of ".htm" had to do with Win3.x. Since Win3.x was/is not
      > a true operating system, it rode piggyback on DOS. And, since DOS only
      > allowed three character extensions it was necessary for HTML browsers to
      > recognize both ".htm" and ".html". Unix, itself, does not care about the
      > extension.
      >
      > Regards,
      >
      > Wayland Fowler
      > Software Engineer (and all around nice guy!)
      > (281) 280-4446
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Larry Hamilton
      Jody, et al, From what I understand, the web server (in most cases Apache), has a configuration file (sort of like an .ini) that determines what extensions it
      Message 2 of 15 , Jan 4, 2001
        Jody, et al,

        From what I understand, the web server (in most cases Apache), has a
        configuration file (sort of like an .ini) that determines what extensions
        it will accept (htm/html or index.htm*/default.htm* as the default page on
        a web site). The same is true of PHP, which is a server-side script
        language, similar in purpose to ASP. With PHP, you can edit its
        configuration file to use whatever extension you desire, instead of the
        .php default. So if you really wanted to, you could use you name, or
        organizations initials, etc. Of course, you have to have access to the
        configuration files on your web host's server to do this, most do not allow
        this, due to the chaos it could cause.

        I have Apache, and PHP on my PC so I can test scripts before I upload them.
        Both are free downloads from their respective homepages:

        apache.org and php.org (I think, a search on Google - www.google.com will
        tell for sure!)

        At 01:30 PM 01/04/2001 -0600, you wrote:
        >That is good to know. Perhaps UNIX will come around someday. I
        >knew UNIX was case sensitive, but not about the .html, else I
        >would not have recently redo my whole NoteTab site to .htm OH
        >well, not changing it back now. :) I just thought that .htm was
        >less to type when doing manual and it made more sense to me
        >because most the rest of HTML files are three letter extensions,
        >at least the ones I use.

        Larry Hamilton, Jr.
        lm_hamilton@...
        http://notlimah.tripod.com/
        Hamilton National Genealogical Society, Inc.
        http://www.hamiltongensociety.org/
      • Wayland_B_Fowler@Raytheon.com
        Jim wrote: So, if I understand correctly Wayland, the limitations were because of web servers running on DOS or older windows (e.g., NT 3.51) or some other OS.
        Message 3 of 15 , Jan 4, 2001
          Jim wrote:
          So, if I understand correctly Wayland, the limitations were because of web
          servers running on DOS or older windows (e.g., NT 3.51) or some other OS.
          Or
          software ported to Unix from those platforms? In other words, why do some
          web servers get cranky about the extensions and others don't, when they're
          running on Unix?

          Jim,
          I wish I could say I was a real expert on this, but that would be
          stretching things, more than just a little. With regard to how these OSs
          deal with files, DOS and Win3.x (and I think 95, 98) are extension
          dependent whereas Unix is attribute dependent. That is, unlike Unix, DOS
          (and its Windows pals) do not know what to do with most files without its
          extension. Same goes for its server software, for example Apache. On
          newer versions of Windows the mime settings can be set to recognize either
          .htm or .html (or if someone is daring enough, any other extension).
          Chances are that, on the newer versions, it already defaults to both. The
          older Windows versions (3.x) would not allow more than the three character
          extension. As far as software ported to unix is concerned, most of its
          servers should be able to handle either extension, if it doesn't then
          perhaps the mime settings (or perhaps a .ini file) for the server software
          should be set to handle both. I think this is correct, if it is not quite
          right, I apologize.

          Harvey wrote:
          Long filenames aside, wouldn't it be difficult to run about any
          version of Windows without booting into some sort of DOS system
          first?

          Harvey,
          Yes, at least versions 3.x, 95, and 98. For version 2000 and for NT, I am
          not sure.

          Regards,

          Wayland Fowler
          Software Engineer (and all around nice guy!)
          (281) 280-4446
        • Jim Beidle
          Thanks for the explanation, Wayland. What you re saying makes sense, along with what I already knew and what Don related in his posting. As to WinNT 4.0 and
          Message 4 of 15 , Jan 4, 2001
            Thanks for the explanation, Wayland. What you're saying makes sense, along
            with what I already knew and what Don related in his posting.

            As to WinNT 4.0 and Win2K, they were developed independently from DOS as
            true 32 bit Operating systems. While they have a "command line" mode that
            emulates DOS in some ways, it isn't DOS and was built from scratch. NT4 goes
            through a non-gui phase during start up as it loads various drivers, but
            this is not directly accessible by "Joe User". That's part of what makes NT
            more secure than its DOS/WIN cousins. A good reference on NT4 structure is
            the _Windows NT Workstation Resource Kit_; Another is _Running Windows NT
            Workstation 4.0_. NoteTab Pro works great on NT, BTW because Eric built it
            as a true 32-bit application. The 16-bit versions of NoteTab or any
            application may periodically fail since they may make DOS calls that aren't
            part of the NT structure. Hope all that helps.. . .

            Jim

            -----Original Message-----
            From: Wayland_B_Fowler@...
            [mailto:Wayland_B_Fowler@...]
            Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 4:04 PM
            To: ntb-html@egroups.com
            Subject: RE: [NH] Dumb question time again


            Jim wrote:
            So, if I understand correctly Wayland, the limitations were because of web
            servers running on DOS or older windows (e.g., NT 3.51) or some other OS.
            Or
            software ported to Unix from those platforms? In other words, why do some
            web servers get cranky about the extensions and others don't, when they're
            running on Unix?

            Jim,
            I wish I could say I was a real expert on this, but that would be
            stretching things, more than just a little. With regard to how these OSs
            deal with files, DOS and Win3.x (and I think 95, 98) are extension
            dependent whereas Unix is attribute dependent. That is, unlike Unix, DOS
            (and its Windows pals) do not know what to do with most files without its
            extension. Same goes for its server software, for example Apache. On
            newer versions of Windows the mime settings can be set to recognize either
            .htm or .html (or if someone is daring enough, any other extension).
            Chances are that, on the newer versions, it already defaults to both. The
            older Windows versions (3.x) would not allow more than the three character
            extension. As far as software ported to unix is concerned, most of its
            servers should be able to handle either extension, if it doesn't then
            perhaps the mime settings (or perhaps a .ini file) for the server software
            should be set to handle both. I think this is correct, if it is not quite
            right, I apologize.

            Harvey wrote:
            Long filenames aside, wouldn't it be difficult to run about any
            version of Windows without booting into some sort of DOS system
            first?

            Harvey,
            Yes, at least versions 3.x, 95, and 98. For version 2000 and for NT, I am
            not sure.

            Regards,

            Wayland Fowler
            Software Engineer (and all around nice guy!)
            (281) 280-4446
          • Toby Scott
            Larry and all, I think all servers can be configured to handle any extension you care to add -- as long as you are the system administrator. In NT and Win2000,
            Message 5 of 15 , Jan 8, 2001
              Larry and all,

              I think all servers can be configured to handle any extension you care to
              add -- as long as you are the system administrator.

              In NT and Win2000, I can add as many default file name and extensions for
              the initial page as I want. If that isn't clear, my default extensions on
              the server I administer are:

              index.htm
              index.html
              index.cfm
              default.htm
              default.html

              If there is an index.htm file in the default directory for a URL, it is
              automatically displayed when someone types www.xyz.com (or whatever). If
              there is no index.htm then index.html will display, etc.

              These are fairly easily configured, but if you are an administrator and
              start setting each URL differently, doing tech support when a client has a
              problem is murder. Therefore, most administrators attempt to keep a fairly
              uniform list. If a customer asks for the default to be set to index.shtml
              for example, I will add it after my standard 5.

              For those of you who wonder, .cfm is Cold Fusion, which is what I mainly
              use.

              Toby Scott
              Ventura County Computers
              2175 Goodyear Avenue
              Suite 117
              Ventura, CA 93003

              (805) 289-3960
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.