"McKirahan" <N***@McKirahan.com> wrote in message
news:BqednTvPTsVbLaTfRVn-uw@comcast.com...
> When developing a new site, I often use the following :
>
>    <!-- This is page: WEB_Page.asp -->
>    <!--#include file="WEB_0.asp"-->
>    <!--#include file="WEB_1.asp"-->
>    <!--#include file="WEB_Page.htm"-->
>    <!--#include file="WEB_2.asp"-->
>
> "WEB" varies and is an acronym for a client's or site's name.
>
> "WEB_Page.asp" is the file above.
> "WEB_0.asp" contains shared ASP variables, subs, etc.
> "WEB_1.asp" contains shared page header HTML.
> "WEB_Page.htm" contains HTML for this page.
> "WEB_2.asp" contains shared page footer HTML.
>
> "WEB_1.asp" includes "WEB_1.css" which contains shared CSS.
>
> Other page names replace "_Page" with their own name.
> E.g., "Conact Us" pages = "WEB_Cont.asp" and "WEB_Cont.htm".
> (I use 8.3 naming as I have some utilities that manage my source.)
>
> I see the advantage to this is that I've isolated the content
> of each page into a file (e.g. "WEB_Page.htm") and can easily
> change the look-and-feel by changing two other files:
> "WEB_1.asp" and "WEB_2.asp" (and maybe "WEB_1.css").
>
> Another advantage is that by using the ".htm" extension,
> I can preview a page's content (albeit without formatting)
> by double-clicking on it's filename in Windows Explorer.
>
> My problem is that if the site already exists and I want to upgrade
> it to this approach (and I don't change page names) then the
> search engines will have already indexed the ".htm" files.
> Thus, visitors would see the "raw" content.
>
> Other than renaming my content with an ".html" extension, how
> can I automatically redirect visitors to the ".asp" page when they
> visit the corresponding ".htm" page?
>
> Thanks in advance for any suggestions.
>
>
> One thought I had while composing this post:
> I could associate a different extension in Windows Explorer
> so that a double-click will still open them in Internet Explorer.
> (And, of course, add a custom 404 page to redirect visitors.)
>
>

"Curt_C [MVP]" <software_AT_darkfalz.com> wrote in message
news:OaBF1AxKFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> delete the .htm and put in some custom handling in the 404 page, to
redirect
> from *.htm to *.asp, maybe keep a list of valid ones to prevent infinite
> looping, etc.
> Or just replace all the code in the .htm files with javascript redirectors
>
> --
> Curt Christianson
> Site & Scripts: http://www.Darkfalz.com
> Blog: http://blog.Darkfalz.com
>
>
> "McKirahan" <N***@McKirahan.com> wrote in message
> news:BqednTvPTsVbLaTfRVn-uw@comcast.com...
> > When developing a new site, I often use the following :
> >
> >    <!-- This is page: WEB_Page.asp -->
> >    <!--#include file="WEB_0.asp"-->
> >    <!--#include file="WEB_1.asp"-->
> >    <!--#include file="WEB_Page.htm"-->
> >    <!--#include file="WEB_2.asp"-->
> >
> > "WEB" varies and is an acronym for a client's or site's name.
> >
> > "WEB_Page.asp" is the file above.
> > "WEB_0.asp" contains shared ASP variables, subs, etc.
> > "WEB_1.asp" contains shared page header HTML.
> > "WEB_Page.htm" contains HTML for this page.
> > "WEB_2.asp" contains shared page footer HTML.
> >
> > "WEB_1.asp" includes "WEB_1.css" which contains shared CSS.
> >
> > Other page names replace "_Page" with their own name.
> > E.g., "Conact Us" pages = "WEB_Cont.asp" and "WEB_Cont.htm".
> > (I use 8.3 naming as I have some utilities that manage my source.)
> >
> > I see the advantage to this is that I've isolated the content
> > of each page into a file (e.g. "WEB_Page.htm") and can easily
> > change the look-and-feel by changing two other files:
> > "WEB_1.asp" and "WEB_2.asp" (and maybe "WEB_1.css").
> >
> > Another advantage is that by using the ".htm" extension,
> > I can preview a page's content (albeit without formatting)
> > by double-clicking on it's filename in Windows Explorer.
> >
> > My problem is that if the site already exists and I want to upgrade
> > it to this approach (and I don't change page names) then the
> > search engines will have already indexed the ".htm" files.
> > Thus, visitors would see the "raw" content.
> >
> > Other than renaming my content with an ".html" extension, how
> > can I automatically redirect visitors to the ".asp" page when they
> > visit the corresponding ".htm" page?
> >
> > Thanks in advance for any suggestions.
> >
> >
> > One thought I had while composing this post:
> > I could associate a different extension in Windows Explorer
> > so that a double-click will still open them in Internet Explorer.
> > (And, of course, add a custom 404 page to redirect visitors.)

"McKirahan" <N***@McKirahan.com> wrote in message
news:f92dnV8zs_nlK6ffRVn-jA@comcast.com...
> Please do not top post:)
>
> "Curt_C [MVP]" <software_AT_darkfalz.com> wrote in message
> news:OaBF1AxKFHA.1172@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > delete the .htm and put in some custom handling in the 404 page, to
> redirect
> > from *.htm to *.asp, maybe keep a list of valid ones to prevent infinite
> > looping, etc.
> > Or just replace all the code in the .htm files with javascript
redirectors
> >
> > --
> > Curt Christianson
> > Site & Scripts: http://www.Darkfalz.com
> > Blog: http://blog.Darkfalz.com
> >
> >
> > "McKirahan" <N***@McKirahan.com> wrote in message
> > news:BqednTvPTsVbLaTfRVn-uw@comcast.com...
> > > When developing a new site, I often use the following :
> > >
> > >    <!-- This is page: WEB_Page.asp -->
> > >    <!--#include file="WEB_0.asp"-->
> > >    <!--#include file="WEB_1.asp"-->
> > >    <!--#include file="WEB_Page.htm"-->
> > >    <!--#include file="WEB_2.asp"-->
> > >
> > > "WEB" varies and is an acronym for a client's or site's name.
> > >
> > > "WEB_Page.asp" is the file above.
> > > "WEB_0.asp" contains shared ASP variables, subs, etc.
> > > "WEB_1.asp" contains shared page header HTML.
> > > "WEB_Page.htm" contains HTML for this page.
> > > "WEB_2.asp" contains shared page footer HTML.
> > >
> > > "WEB_1.asp" includes "WEB_1.css" which contains shared CSS.
> > >
> > > Other page names replace "_Page" with their own name.
> > > E.g., "Conact Us" pages = "WEB_Cont.asp" and "WEB_Cont.htm".
> > > (I use 8.3 naming as I have some utilities that manage my source.)
> > >
> > > I see the advantage to this is that I've isolated the content
> > > of each page into a file (e.g. "WEB_Page.htm") and can easily
> > > change the look-and-feel by changing two other files:
> > > "WEB_1.asp" and "WEB_2.asp" (and maybe "WEB_1.css").
> > >
> > > Another advantage is that by using the ".htm" extension,
> > > I can preview a page's content (albeit without formatting)
> > > by double-clicking on it's filename in Windows Explorer.
> > >
> > > My problem is that if the site already exists and I want to upgrade
> > > it to this approach (and I don't change page names) then the
> > > search engines will have already indexed the ".htm" files.
> > > Thus, visitors would see the "raw" content.
> > >
> > > Other than renaming my content with an ".html" extension, how
> > > can I automatically redirect visitors to the ".asp" page when they
> > > visit the corresponding ".htm" page?
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance for any suggestions.
> > >
> > >
> > > One thought I had while composing this post:
> > > I could associate a different extension in Windows Explorer
> > > so that a double-click will still open them in Internet Explorer.
> > > (And, of course, add a custom 404 page to redirect visitors.)
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> Placing the following at the top of "WEB_Page.htm" seems to work:
>
> <%  If 0 = 1 Then %>
> <meta http-equiv="refresh" content="0;
> URL=http://www.domain.com/WEB_Page.asp">
> <%  End If %>
>
> even though the <meta> tag is in the body of the page (inside of a table).
>
> The <meta> tag executes when the ".htm" page is invoked but is ignored if
> the ".asp" page (which "includes" the ".htm" file) is invoked.
>
> Any thoughts (from anyone)?  Thanks.
>
>

"Aaron [SQL Server MVP]" <ten.xoc@dnartreb.noraa> wrote in message
news:ONk0OE9KFHA.3832@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>> "When replying to a message on the group trim quotes of the
>>   preceding messages to the minimum needed and add your comments
>>   below the pertinent section of quoted material, as per
>>   FYI28/RFC1855 (never top post)."
>>
>> -- http://www.jibbering.com/faq/
>
> Oh Christ, not this again.
>
> I use both styles depending on the situation, and I'll stop using NNTP
> entirely before I'll be told how I should help people based on some stupid
> global dictation on some web site.
>
>