Re: html/ vs .htmld

Rohit Khare (khare)
Mon, 6 Feb 1995 20:54:40 -0800


I rescind my hypothesizing and now agree that the one true answer is .htmld,
rather than oversloading ".html as a file" and ".html as a directory".

The proposed benefit of CERN, etc, servers automatically expanding foo to
foo.html (and then to foo.html/index.rtf) isn't worth violating the clear UI
guideline to separate file-type from wrapper-type (.rtf vs .rtfd).

The DOS filename mapping would now be .HTM and .HTD, per Scott's question of
cross-platform compatibility.

Any debate? I don't mean to sound dogmatic...

Rohit