lorax
msg:966394 | 3:22 am on Nov 3, 2002 (gmt 0) |
SHTML is the common extension used to denote a file that uses Server Side Includes. Learn more here: [apacheweek.com...]
|
john316
msg:966395 | 4:15 am on Nov 3, 2002 (gmt 0) |
<html>
<head>
<title>Test</title>
</head>
<body>
<!--#echo var="DATE_LOCAL" -->
</body>
</html> Copy and paste this into a text file, save it as test.shtml or something like that, put it on your server and call it from a browser. If it shows the date, ssi is enabled on your server.
|
lazyz
msg:966396 | 2:42 pm on Nov 3, 2002 (gmt 0) |
Thank you - One more question, is it common to make an index page index.shtml versus .html? My main page needs to use SSI.
|
lorax
msg:966397 | 2:48 pm on Nov 3, 2002 (gmt 0) |
Well, it's not that far out of the ordinary. The SEs will receive the page as if it had no includes and as far as I know, there is no disadvantage to doing this.
|
bobriggs
msg:966398 | 2:49 pm on Nov 3, 2002 (gmt 0) |
You can name it .html: [httpd.apache.org...]
Add: AddHandler server-parsed .html in your .htaccess file and they'll all be parsed as a server side include.
|
jatar_k
msg:966399 | 6:30 pm on Nov 3, 2002 (gmt 0) |
Having an shtml index page is perfectly acceptable and not uncommon. When using addhandler, remember to make sure you only try to parse one lang/protocol for each extension. I have seen people try to get ssi and php both parsed for the .html extension, makes one heck of a mess. I use .shtml // for ssi
.html // for php
.htm // for plain vanilla html
|
lazyz
msg:966400 | 7:08 pm on Nov 3, 2002 (gmt 0) |
Thanks to everyone! It works great! I feel a little smarter today!
|
|
