On IIS you can use server side includes in a ".htm" file.Do this: Open IIS - website (righ button) - properties - home directory - configuration - Add. So, you will associate the .dll asp to .htm extension like this:
Executable: C:\WINDOWS\system32\inetsrv\asp.dll
You wrote:
>>
Using standards, which is the best way to achieve this:
1.
2.
3.
>>
I don't think the way you include has anything to do with standards.
*What* you include does...that is, whatever you include will be rendered
by the server when the page is requested, and delivered to th
This thread is really off topic so let's leave it here, but to correct
something (sorry Lachlan)...
This works on IIS as well, as long as it's a .shtml or .shtm file to tell IIS
to parse it for any required processing (like an include) before serving it
(unless your host doesn't allow them). IC
> Svip
> Actually, the best way would be to use PHP,
If it's only a case of including a piece of static content inside another page,
there's really no advantage in using PHP over simple server-side includes.
> and besides, we do not
> tend to call them "HTM" pages, but rather "HTML" pages.
Pos
They work fine on IIS in windows, as long as your using .shtml or .asp as your file extension.
As long as the code in the file you are calling is standards compliant, it doesn't make any difference how you call it. The browser will just treat the code as if it were part of the calling page, just li
Svip wrote:
On 18/01/06, KJ Callender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I want to include a file to be included into about 10 htm pages, and to
save time me updating them individually, i want to use a include file.
Using standards, which is the best way to achieve this:
1.
It could be done as fo
Actually, the best way would be to use PHP, and besides, we do not
tend to call them "HTM" pages, but rather "HTML" pages. And thus the
filetype after its name is useless.
It could be done as following in PHP:
Which would not include your "comment" mark, and I do not know either
if your way is
