You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@sling.apache.org by Tobias Bocanegra <to...@day.com> on 2008/02/21 16:50:06 UTC
Re: Change server side JavaScript extension to ecma (was: How to I chmod -x on Javascript files)
+1 good idea. but would be ".es" a better extension?
".jsp" <--> ".esp"
".js" <--> ".es"
regards, toby
On 2/21/08, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Currently the extension ".js" is used as an extension for JavaScript
> files, regardless of whether they are intended to be executed on the
> server or client side. This might cause confusion for developers and
> might present problems when accessing such scripts to get them for
> client-side execution.
>
> I propose to acknowledge the ".js" extension to be used only for
> client-side scripts and to use ".ecma" for server side JavaScript files.
>
> WDYT ?
>
> Regards
>
> Felix
>
>
--
-----------------------------------------< tobias.bocanegra@day.com >---
Tobias Bocanegra, Day Management AG, Barfuesserplatz 6, CH - 4001 Basel
T +41 61 226 98 98, F +41 61 226 98 97
-----------------------------------------------< http://www.day.com >---
Re: Change server side JavaScript extension to ecma (was: How to I chmod -x on Javascript files)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 7:58 AM, Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ... Basically, both .ecma and .es are ok for me. But then "es" sounds much
> like the two-letter country code for Spain ...
I'd be fine with .ecma as well. Unless someone wants to suggest .ch ?
-Bertrand (ducks and runs)
Re: Change server side JavaScript extension to ecma (was: How to I
chmod -x on Javascript files)
Posted by Felix Meschberger <fm...@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
Basically, both .ecma and .es are ok for me. But then "es" sounds much
like the two-letter country code for Spain ...
Regards
Felix
Am Donnerstag, den 21.02.2008, 18:10 +0100 schrieb David Nuescheler:
> hi guys,
>
> as I mentioned in the other thread, I think the primary
> issue is with making sure to delegate all the exact matches
> in the repository to "static" webdav delivery.
>
> I think that renaming the server-side ecma script stuff is great
> and should be done as soon as possible ;)
> I only have a very smallish bias for ".ecma" over ".es"
>
> regards,
> david
>
> On 2/21/08, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 4:50 PM, Tobias Bocanegra
> > <to...@day.com> wrote:
> > > +1 good idea. but would be ".es" a better extension?
> >
> >
> > Agree with .es
> >
> >
> > -Bertrand
> >
Re: Change server side JavaScript extension to ecma (was: How to I chmod -x on Javascript files)
Posted by David Nuescheler <da...@day.com>.
hi guys,
as I mentioned in the other thread, I think the primary
issue is with making sure to delegate all the exact matches
in the repository to "static" webdav delivery.
I think that renaming the server-side ecma script stuff is great
and should be done as soon as possible ;)
I only have a very smallish bias for ".ecma" over ".es"
regards,
david
On 2/21/08, Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 4:50 PM, Tobias Bocanegra
> <to...@day.com> wrote:
> > +1 good idea. but would be ".es" a better extension?
>
>
> Agree with .es
>
>
> -Bertrand
>
Re: Change server side JavaScript extension to ecma (was: How to I chmod -x on Javascript files)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 4:50 PM, Tobias Bocanegra
<to...@day.com> wrote:
> +1 good idea. but would be ".es" a better extension?
Agree with .es
-Bertrand