Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from

Forum Moderators: mademetop

Message Too Old, No Replies

.htm vs .html



3:45 am on Jun 2, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

Silly simple question. My unleet searching skills came up with nothing.

In your proffessional opinions, does .html fair worse then .htm for the SERPs?

I'm just really old fashioned and insistant on .html with my stubborn ways. Thanks.


4:34 am on Jun 2, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member jdmorgan is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

.htm is a direct result of the old 8+3 character file naming restriction of MS DOS and some older operating systems. Search engines don't care whether you use .htm or .html, or even .php, so take your pick.



8:59 pm on Jun 2, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

I've previously used .fred

Simply because I was bored and it allowed me to do a simple search for


to find out what pages were indexed. The added value that I didn't think of at the time was that it caused some viral interest in the page naming convention.


2:27 am on Jun 11, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

there is a small body of anecdotal evidence that suggests google prefers the .htm extension, but I've seen no real evidence of this. .txt files seem to do really well, heh, php all the way for me baby!

I imagine, so long as the spider can parse the text data it GETs, it can be indexed. I've seen some wacky extensions do very well.



Featured Threads

Hot Threads This Week

Hot Threads This Month