After much googling around (I was fascinated by this question) and much reading of various W3C documents here and there, I can say with about 97.3% certainty that the W3C has never drafted a recommendation that standardized file extensions. Most of their recommendations include URI examples that use the .html extension and the site itself appears to use .html extensions: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/Cover.html.

The real story of why .htm and three letter extensions were ever used is told in a round about way here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filename_extension .

Given the history of filename extensions, I can see how someone might think that a three-letter extension is required (and maybe--for some strange reason--the server's settings do require html to be served as .htm and .html files are served differently). Whatever the case, the W3C doesn't recommend .htm as a standard.

--
Jody Tate
Web Developer - UW Network Systems
http://staff.washington.edu/jtate/




*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************

Reply via email to