I know there are:
.aspx
.php
.html
.htm
This is the first time I'm seeing a website with .sd at the end. What exactly does that mean and is there a wiki that explains a bit more?
For example, this website:
http://www.racingpost.com/horses2/results/home.sd
First time I'm seeing it and I'm just curious.
Because the choice of extension is practically meaningless on the web - the content-type header defines the actual format of the content - there are lots of exotic extensions around, mostly defined by the CMS or framework used. I'm pretty sure this is not an "own format" in the sense that "html", "aspx" and "php" differ from each other internally by containing raw HTML, PHP code, or ASP code, but just a "vanity extension" if you will.
Can you show us the web site in question? Maybe somebody can hazard a guess what CMS/platform it was built with.
Edited for the url you added: that specific one is most likely being used with the BlueDragon system, a family of runtime server-side products for the deployment of CFML pages, deployed in possibly a j2ee environment.
for instance you can google the site for references:
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anewatlanta.com+%22sd
or see a servlet debug page:
http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:yg7UIh6nRdIJ:www.lucasoil.com/landing_pages/14,3.html/+%22index.sd%22+bluedragon&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
or you may be referring to the TLD (top-level domain name).
the TLD .sd belongs to country of Sudan which is managed by the Sudan Internet Society:
http://www.isoc.sd/sudanic.isoc.sd/
.sd could be anything. According to Fileinfo.com it is the default extension for some type of audio file.
However, I could make a php page called index.sd and as long as I have my webserver configured in the correct way, it would serve it up as php. That goes for other things as well, .html, .py, .pl... etc, etc.
I would just need to add this to my configuration file for apache:
AddType application/x-httpd-php .sd
According to fileinfo .sd is an audio file.
The Top Level Domain .sd denotes Sudan.
Other than that, you can come up with any extension you want (or even use an existing one) and point it to any handler you want, say, in your web server, or in your code. (In the .NET world, you can define your own MIME types through IIS, or setup Http Handlers in your web.config)
Good old "view source" shows that it is just HTML.
At a guess, it's probably one of the above - it's pretty trivial to get a webserver to arbitrarily treat a file as whatever you want irrespective of its extension.
.sd is for SUDAN
like .in for India
.us for USA
Related
I am using vorto plugin in my Umbraco 7 application to achieve the multilingual capability.
I mentioned the URL in hostname as 'localhost/clientname/en'.
Whenever I open login page the URL which is getting form is 'http://localhost/clientname/en/login'.
This is the structure of vorto URL writing.
But can I achieve it like 'http://localhost/clientname/login/en' ???
I want language names at the end of the URL, not in between.
Is it possible ?
Please help....i am badly stuck in my project task !
It sounds like you need a custom URL provider, setting the domain to 'localhost/clientname/en' will mean that the URLs will always get added AFTER the language part as the host is always the first part of the URL.
Have a look at this article on URL providers and content finders: https://24days.in/umbraco-cms/2014/urlprovider-and-contentfinder/ it's quite old, but it should still work. That should give you an idea of how to make it work. Basically you want the URL provider to append the language to the end of the URL, and the content finder to strip the language from the end and then find the actual content. You can also then set the language of the current thread in the content finder so that Vorto and Umbraco are using the correct language based on the URL.
I know it's not a good question to ask, but sometimes I really need to know if a webpage or website is static or not.
Sometimes I see .html extension in many URL, Does that mean that those pages are static?
.html extension means that page contains only front-end code and does not have any server side language included in it (I'm not talking about URL rewriters that adds .html to the end of virtual path).
This does not prevent these things:
Page can load it's content via Ajax depending on inputs, URL params, time of day, etc.
Page can be generated as static HTML page, but still be re-generated from time-to-time.
You can have iFrame in static HTML page that leads to .php file.
Not really, .html does not mean webpage is static. Ajax can be used to load dynamic data in html page.
Also there is no proper method defined to find whether page is static or dynamic.
One way is, you can check requests in Developer Options of browser.
You can read more here.
No.
There is no guarantee of a direct relationship between a thing that looks like a file extension in a URL and how the server handles things behind the scenes.
It might be resolved using basic static file handling rules to a static file with that name.
It might use a tool like mod_write to map the URL onto a server side script with the same name but a different file extension (e.g. if the site used to be made of static files, but was changed to be dynamic with steps taken to keep the URLs unchanged).
It might use a tool like mod_write to map the URL onto a server side script that has no relation to the name of the file but implements the front controller pattern for the whole site.
It might map onto a server side script which looks at the end of the URL to determine what type of data to return the content in (e.g. cars.html and cards.json might both be be handled by the same script, which outputs a list of cars, but it might output it in JSON or HTML depending on the URL).
It might hit a 404 error or a 302 redirect.
It might do any number of other things.
Not always, sometimes it can be a generated page from a Servlet or a PHP script that generates them. you can have a .htaccess rule to add .html to all documents.
I need to add a term to the URL's within a sub-directory of a website I'm working on to boost/enhance SEO. For example, http://www.domain.com/shop/product/ should go to http://www.domain.com/shop/product-SEO/ instead. I need to set this up in web.config and looked at examples on here but couldn't find anything similar. Any help?
The feature you are looking for is called URL Rewriting.
You should have a look at the following link, it will provide everything you need:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms972974.aspx
I have a website on a 1and1 server. I have 2 domains on the package; the default url somenumbers.websitehome.co.uk and my actual URL.
The problem is, Joomla quotes the somoenumbers.websitehome.co.uk in system e-mails instead of my actual URL. They both point to the same directory I just don't want to give a stupid URL to my users.
I think I have narrowed it down to the $siteUrl variable but I'm not sure how to go from here.
Thanks
James
At first I thought this sounded largely like a DNS issue - but then you said you only have 1 Joomla installation and both domains point to that directory.
If they're both pointing to the same directory, then both domains will display the same Joomla installation. That is, unless you're checking to see where they are coming from and having the content display dynamically based upon how they got to your site - but from your comments I doubt you're doing that. How your domains are behaving is the expected response if you're pointing them both to the same directory.
If you want 2 sites on the same hosting? Setup 2 databases (or apply different prefix for each site and use 1 database) and set up each website in it's own directory.
Adjust the DNS of each domain name (and subdomain name) to point the appropriate directory.
From there, use the .htaccess file and SEF URL's to get rid of any indicator of the directory so that it displays the same as if the site was in the root directory.
That is the best way to accomplish what you're after - because from the sounds of it Joomla is doing exactly as it should, displaying correctly what is in the directory since both domain names point to the same directory.
$siteUrl should be left blank.
We can see many HTML page using src="//example.com/myjavascript.js" to include a .js and let the browser use http:// / https:// depending on the current scheme of the page URL.
Is this a valid URI ?
Yes, it is definitely valid. It is a "scheme relative" or "protocol relative" URI. In the spec since the beginning. Quite helpful to deal with http/https issues.
Read a much better description and caveats:
Is it valid to replace http:// with // in a <script src="http://...">?
A few points to keep in mind:
There are some minor issues on IE 7 & 8 with double downloads
If you are viewing an HTML page from a file the browser will replace the scheme with file://, and not load your JS file from the server like it would with a full URL starting with http:// or https://.
Edit for modern webdev practices:
While the URL is still valid, it is now recommended to use https for third party resources (and, serve those resources from secure pages). The performance or compatibility issues from years ago are largely resolved with updated protocols and browsers.
As a warning... we encountered issues with this methodology NOT being supported in Internet Explorer when used inside the HTML BASE tag (IE8 and 9 confirmed, didn't test any others before patching the issue).
After newly implementing SSL on a website, we had initially updated the BASE tags across the application to simply reference "//www.mydomain.com" : but the page templates broke (in IE only) on all scripts which did NOT live at the root of the site. Makes sense, since the BASE tag was not picking up the stylesheet or other relatively-linked resources which assumed they were being referenced from root, not from a nested location.
Since the BASE URI was our own domain anyway, we fixed the issue by setting the BASE tag's value to "https://www.mydomain.com". No matter if the client is browsing the site in SSL mode or out, at least it will work cross-browser now and can ALWAYS find its content - and by forcing https at all times, we ensure we don't get any content-mismatch warnings in the process by setting the BASE path to an http location while browsing a page using https.
It is valid indeed and I have just learned this in the hard way!! We broke a customization feature so you should always validate an URL like this (in .NET):
Pay attention to:
White spaces (Trim)
"scheme relative" URI (UriKind.RelativeOrAbsolute)
public bool IsValidUrl(string resourceUrl)
{
Uri uri;
if (Uri.TryCreate(resourceUrl.Trim(), UriKind.RelativeOrAbsolute, out uri))
{
return uri.IsWellFormedOriginalString();
}
return false;
}