Hello,<br />
I'm brand new to the forums but have been coding sites for the better part of 5 years. I'm a 19 year old college student currently attending RACC in Pennsylvania. I'm currently a student in a WEB 100 class teaching the principles of basic web design (which is pretty easy stuff for me). Tonight I ran into an issue, I'm required to save my files as ".htm" rather than ".html". Now I'm sure there are arguements for both sides as to why you should use each however I'd like to hear some good reasons why a college is teaching people to do this when both ways work. So ofcourse you can tell where I stand, I use ".html". Are there plans to do away with the extra letter? Sure it's not a big deal but after working with websites for so long I feel as though its almost encroaching upon my personal style. I'd like to think that both are accepted, just cruise over to htmlgoodies.com and one can see that using either form should be ok. BTW, if you are a respected professor/designer and use ".html" too I would REALLY love to hear your side and whether or not you think its right to knock points off otherwise nicely coded works of art and what you think about teaching one specific way in the classroom. Oh yeah, the arguement that my teacher used for ".htm" was consistency and the fact that Dreamweaver does it, now all you hand coders out there what you think of that?
<!--content-->Don't know how far you could argue this one either way (.htm or .html). The Dreamweaver argument is rather lame, but the consistancy one is entirely valid. Think of it this way: I'd be willing to bet that most web design firms have a "standard" as to using .htm or .html files for ease of use. Otherwise, you'd constantly have to be checking the extention of files that other developers made. You'd have some .htm and some .html. I'd be a mess. Just consider this practice... <!--content-->I deffinetly understand that but correct me if I'm wrong, if you check out htmlgoodies.com it appears that ".html" can be used in newer operating systems. Despite that I guess I'm a little frustrated because I've just been doing it this way for so long and if both ways work, why should I fail because I named my files .html? Thanks for the input though I know it's mostly about consistency but ya know consistency between developers is important right?...not every developer in the world. I mean if one person designs everything using one of those two extensions what would be wrong with that? I just get the feeling that this course is trying to turn me into something a lot less than what I am now by conforming me to a standard that seems way too defined. It is only school though I just prefer to think of all the options at once if they all can work in the real world why are they teaching kids and more importantly older people who try so hard to learn this stuff that there is only one way.<!--content-->Two points...<br />
<br />
1: HTML Goodies sucks. Forget you ever know about that site, and start using <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.w3.org">http://www.w3.org</a><!-- m --> as your reference (or <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.w3schools.com">http://www.w3schools.com</a><!-- m --> if you are the tutorial type).<br />
<br />
2: I guess I'm a bit confused. I'm assuming you knew you were supposed to use .htm as the extention? If so, why'd you use .html?<br />
<br />
Also, you are correct in saying that consistancy among the developers is what is needed, but one could easily see why a school would want to keep things consistant, as well.<!--content-->Does not matter what extension you use as long as you serve the file with correct MIME type. There are arguements not to use extensions at all - it will preserve your URI if you decide to change your "html" to "asp" or "php".<br />
<br />
Someone saying "You should use this or that extension" is clueless.<!--content-->hehe I never said that I turned anything in with the extension. I was questioning why there is such a requirement in the first place. I sent an email to the web program coordinator and like I figured he basically considered me to be an ignorant kid. The purpose of this discussion was to see what you guys think of how schools are trying to bring things together. Sure consistency is important, but does that mean that ".html" still can't create usable content? Why is one way taught over the other? Why not both be taught and adaptability to the situation be stressed (i.e. working for a web firm which requires you to use one method)? Thanks for the input though I really like hearing what other people think, I personally believe, however, that professors don't like to be told differently. All I have to say about that is go ask penn state, in a recent study they found that professors will more often have to serve to facilitate learning, thats the new trend in any educational teaching right now (if your learning to be a teacher).<!--content-->In older versions of windows you could only have three letter file extensions. .htm is a relic of that. <br />
<br />
Don't ask me where I found that out. I can't remember <br />
<br />
I use .htm because... because... the files just get saved that way. LOL
<!--content-->Originally posted by DaveSW <br />
In older versions of windows you could only have three letter file extensions. .htm is a relic of that. <br />
<br />
Don't ask me where I found that out. I can't remember <br />
<br />
I use .htm because... because... the files just get saved that way. LOL <br />
<br />
The history of the .htm extension was taught to me in a internet class and you are correct. Extensions could only be three characters long, so that's what they used. I actually prefer using the .html extension and I see no reason why a teacher should force students into using one over the other if consistantcy is the real issue. If you are consistant in naming of things, that's what should be more important. I would mark off things like invalid code before I would worry about what kind of extension was being used. I doubt I would care at all.<!--content-->Use whichever one you like best, but just stick with it. I use .htm cause I'm lazy and it's one less letter.<!--content-->It seems like you guys feel the same way I do. I hate making a big deal over something like this but it really just goes back to how the language is being taught and what gets me is that this guy is smart and knows what he's talking about, he's the web program coordinator of the college, and he pretty much fails to see the logic in something so simple and just wants to stick to his way of doing things. Oh well, I guess what I got out of this is that I'm a lot younger and I can see a flaw in the way of thinking that someone with a degree who is much older than me can't spot. Thanks for the input!
<!--content-->
I'm brand new to the forums but have been coding sites for the better part of 5 years. I'm a 19 year old college student currently attending RACC in Pennsylvania. I'm currently a student in a WEB 100 class teaching the principles of basic web design (which is pretty easy stuff for me). Tonight I ran into an issue, I'm required to save my files as ".htm" rather than ".html". Now I'm sure there are arguements for both sides as to why you should use each however I'd like to hear some good reasons why a college is teaching people to do this when both ways work. So ofcourse you can tell where I stand, I use ".html". Are there plans to do away with the extra letter? Sure it's not a big deal but after working with websites for so long I feel as though its almost encroaching upon my personal style. I'd like to think that both are accepted, just cruise over to htmlgoodies.com and one can see that using either form should be ok. BTW, if you are a respected professor/designer and use ".html" too I would REALLY love to hear your side and whether or not you think its right to knock points off otherwise nicely coded works of art and what you think about teaching one specific way in the classroom. Oh yeah, the arguement that my teacher used for ".htm" was consistency and the fact that Dreamweaver does it, now all you hand coders out there what you think of that?
<!--content-->Don't know how far you could argue this one either way (.htm or .html). The Dreamweaver argument is rather lame, but the consistancy one is entirely valid. Think of it this way: I'd be willing to bet that most web design firms have a "standard" as to using .htm or .html files for ease of use. Otherwise, you'd constantly have to be checking the extention of files that other developers made. You'd have some .htm and some .html. I'd be a mess. Just consider this practice... <!--content-->I deffinetly understand that but correct me if I'm wrong, if you check out htmlgoodies.com it appears that ".html" can be used in newer operating systems. Despite that I guess I'm a little frustrated because I've just been doing it this way for so long and if both ways work, why should I fail because I named my files .html? Thanks for the input though I know it's mostly about consistency but ya know consistency between developers is important right?...not every developer in the world. I mean if one person designs everything using one of those two extensions what would be wrong with that? I just get the feeling that this course is trying to turn me into something a lot less than what I am now by conforming me to a standard that seems way too defined. It is only school though I just prefer to think of all the options at once if they all can work in the real world why are they teaching kids and more importantly older people who try so hard to learn this stuff that there is only one way.<!--content-->Two points...<br /><br />
1: HTML Goodies sucks. Forget you ever know about that site, and start using <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.w3.org">http://www.w3.org</a><!-- m --> as your reference (or <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.w3schools.com">http://www.w3schools.com</a><!-- m --> if you are the tutorial type).<br />
<br />
2: I guess I'm a bit confused. I'm assuming you knew you were supposed to use .htm as the extention? If so, why'd you use .html?<br />
<br />
Also, you are correct in saying that consistancy among the developers is what is needed, but one could easily see why a school would want to keep things consistant, as well.<!--content-->Does not matter what extension you use as long as you serve the file with correct MIME type. There are arguements not to use extensions at all - it will preserve your URI if you decide to change your "html" to "asp" or "php".<br />
<br />
Someone saying "You should use this or that extension" is clueless.<!--content-->hehe I never said that I turned anything in with the extension. I was questioning why there is such a requirement in the first place. I sent an email to the web program coordinator and like I figured he basically considered me to be an ignorant kid. The purpose of this discussion was to see what you guys think of how schools are trying to bring things together. Sure consistency is important, but does that mean that ".html" still can't create usable content? Why is one way taught over the other? Why not both be taught and adaptability to the situation be stressed (i.e. working for a web firm which requires you to use one method)? Thanks for the input though I really like hearing what other people think, I personally believe, however, that professors don't like to be told differently. All I have to say about that is go ask penn state, in a recent study they found that professors will more often have to serve to facilitate learning, thats the new trend in any educational teaching right now (if your learning to be a teacher).<!--content-->In older versions of windows you could only have three letter file extensions. .htm is a relic of that. <br />
<br />
Don't ask me where I found that out. I can't remember <br />
<br />
I use .htm because... because... the files just get saved that way. LOL
<!--content-->Originally posted by DaveSW <br />In older versions of windows you could only have three letter file extensions. .htm is a relic of that. <br />
<br />
Don't ask me where I found that out. I can't remember <br />
<br />
I use .htm because... because... the files just get saved that way. LOL
<br /><br />
The history of the .htm extension was taught to me in a internet class and you are correct. Extensions could only be three characters long, so that's what they used. I actually prefer using the .html extension and I see no reason why a teacher should force students into using one over the other if consistantcy is the real issue. If you are consistant in naming of things, that's what should be more important. I would mark off things like invalid code before I would worry about what kind of extension was being used. I doubt I would care at all.<!--content-->Use whichever one you like best, but just stick with it. I use .htm cause I'm lazy and it's one less letter.<!--content-->It seems like you guys feel the same way I do. I hate making a big deal over something like this but it really just goes back to how the language is being taught and what gets me is that this guy is smart and knows what he's talking about, he's the web program coordinator of the college, and he pretty much fails to see the logic in something so simple and just wants to stick to his way of doing things. Oh well, I guess what I got out of this is that I'm a lot younger and I can see a flaw in the way of thinking that someone with a degree who is much older than me can't spot. Thanks for the input!
<!--content-->